Dear Klaus, Ken, David and all
I fully concur to both suggestions that, prior to designing, one should
first conduct any relevant literature review, and second, "do review the
post design consequences". Particularly on this last one, I guess by
"post-design histories, the histories of successes and failures", you meant
both histories directly 'told' by artefacts themselves, eventually together
with 'distilled' interpretations by various users and observers.
Methods to investigate users and observers interpretations have been amply
developed in Social Sciences. Yet in my view, we, designers, still have to
assess how those methods yield results useful enough for artefact designing
purpose. And in addition, to my present knowledge, besides forensic and
accident/catastrophe investigations, I think there aren't plenty of methods
available to directly 'interrogate' artefacts' evidence of their
"post-design" harmlessness and usefulness.
David, at your Communication Research Institute, you have developed such a
method to assess - and design for - graphic harmlessness and usefulness
evidence. Perhaps there is a need to develop and make widely known similar
methods that would be appropriate to evidence, prior or after designing,
eventual "post-design" effects of other kind of artefacts?
Best wishes to all
Francois
Montreal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|