On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 3:18 AM, David Sless <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Where I was sitting at that grumpy moment was reflecting on a large pile
> of published papers that added so little new insights.
I sympathize with David. The worst part is that his complaint
appears to be universal. It is not restricted to design
.
As someone who has worked in and read papers in numerous fields, including
electrical engineering, computer science, economics, psychology, cognitive
science and yes, even design, let me add that in every field, most of the
huge mass of published papers add little insights. I have asked my
colleagues in other fields (e.g., physics, literature, music). They all
agree.
The mass of papers are useful, I might add. They fill in the details, add
new examples or refute old studies. But, on the whole, they are small, and
when a new paradigm emerges, they disappear from memory, even if the total
sum of those small efforts is what triggered the new paradigm.
Amazing, but new insights are rare indeed. It is the rare paper that rises
above the herd and surveys the entire landscape, understands where it is
going, and moves the entire discipline forward (or occasionally in an
entirely new direction). Rare in design? Yes, but rare in every discipline.
Don
Don Norman
Director, DesignLab, UC San Diego: Think Observe Make
Prof. Emeritus Cognitive Science & Psychology, UCSD
[log in to unmask] www.jnd.org <http://www.jnd.org/>
http://designlab.ucsd.edu/
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|