I answered with a quotation? Come off it, Eduardo. I didn't want to be
drawn into an argument on this issue, but to day I provided a "quotation"
is simply erroneous.
I answered with the statement that the research literature is filled with
evidence. I provided a link to the Wikipedia article that had many other
citations, but this was just for one of the many phenomena that were
relevant. I did not want to spend my day providing research citations for
what I considered a small part of the paper I was presenting.
The response was to say that the research is irrelevant and that any good
designer knows how to circumvent the problem. I call that a defensive
response with zero evidence.
Of course, overlooked in this debate is the fact that in our article,
Verganti and I attempted to be constructive in suggesting ways that
designers can overcome this problem. For some reason, I was attacked for a
statement that stated that the traditional human-centered design method
was particularly susceptible to being trapped by the existing paradigms.
Well, I stand by that statement. I believe it is justified through an
incredible amount of existing psychological research. I believe it applies
to my own work as well: I have to make a strong effort to avoid being
captured by existing paradigms.
If some of you wish to discount that, it is your right. But it would be
useful to see some evidence.
Don
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Eduardo Corte-Real <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I Terry, it is interesting that Cameron asked for "qualification, if not
> evidence" and Don answered with quotations. That's a good example of what
> you are saying.
> Best,
> Eduardo
> Corte-Real Dr Arch. Professor IADE
>
|