Dear Colleagues,
At Moholy-Nagy University of Art and Design Budapest (Hungary) we are
organizing a conference on immersive storytelling (interactive narrative,
AR, VR, immersive storytelling, video games, interactive videos, 360 videos
etc). If you are interested we kindly invite you to submit your abstract by
25th of June (extended deadline!!!).
Conference dates: 8-10 November, 2018. For further details and topics
please click here: http://mome.hu/hu/h%C3%ADrek/1704-zip-scene-
conference-analogue-and-digital-immersive-environments-call-for-papers or
see&join our Facebook Event:
https://www.facebook.com/events/1388864334548608/
Best wishes,
Ágnes Bakk (Moholy-Nagy University of Art and Design, Budapest)
2018-06-22 1:00 GMT+02:00 PHD-DESIGN automatic digest system <
[log in to unmask]>:
> There are 8 messages totaling 718 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. - Call for participation in International survey on Design expertise
> (3)
> 2. Domains of Design Knowledge (3)
> 3. DNR PGR Conference call for papers
> 4. INVITATION FOR PARTICIPATION: Ethics through Design Conversation @
> DRS2018
> Limerick Thurs 28 Jun, 14:00-15:30
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:32:14 +1000
> From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: - Call for participation in International survey on Design
> expertise
>
> > On 20 Jun 2018, at 3:13 pm, Ali Ilhan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Surveys might be problematic in your context, but they have their uses.
> For
> > some types of research questions, they are the best tool we have. For
> some
> > others, they are an absolute pain in the neck. You can say the same thing
> > easily for experiments, interviews, ethnography etc.
>
> Without extending this discussion much further than I have already, I will
> just say that I think your ecumenical approach underestimates the extent of
> the validity crisis in survey research. It’s not a case of horses for
> courses. Some horses are born lame and are best euthanised.
>
> David
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> blog: http://communication.org.au/blo <http://communication.org.au/blo>g/
> web: http://communication.org.au <http://communication.org.au/>
>
> Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
> CEO • Communication Research Institute •
> • helping people communicate with people •
>
> Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
> Phone: +61 (03) 9005 5903
> Skype: davidsless
>
> 60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 01:27:42 +0000
> From: Lubomir Savov Popov <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: - Call for participation in International survey on Design
> expertise
>
> Dear David,
>
> We don't want to go to the extremes. There is no universal method. And
> many methods that are rebuked are pretty good if people know in which
> situations to use them and how to use them. Even the survey and the
> experiment. Pollsters use them pretty well. If there are "errors" within 15
> percentage points, they are actually ordered and paid by the clients.
>
> The real surveys in 2016 US Presidential Elections were quite accurate.
> But the media were airing the data that the clients wanted to trumpet. No
> one came forward to talk about the realistic data. Then, people were
> surprised of the election outcome. (Sociologists foresaw the eventual
> election outcomes as early as late September.) One simple trick in an
> election campaign is to convince your voters that you will win. Then voters
> become more enthusiastic and go to the ballot boxes. Very often the biggest
> problem of the politicians is to make voters go to the ballot boxes. That
> is why the politicians are trying to convince their voters that they will
> win with a 20% margin.
>
> In polling, the agencies make studies how the sequence of questions and
> their wording will affect the results.
>
> Surveys work well if people know how to do them. And if the phenomenon
> that is researched is well understood and there are good theoretical models
> to guide the development of the survey questions. Also, if the sampling
> strategy and implementation are appropriate. Ali already talked about the
> methodology of survey design.
>
> Surveys can be manipulated with ease. The data collected depend on the
> wording of questions, the sequencing of questioners, etc. If you want to
> raise your party approval values we can do this with ease, up to 10-15
> percentage points. This the data can be easily "defended" even when the
> professed theoretical model and the sampling strategy are scrutinized and
> questioned.
>
> And there is nothing worse than a poor survey. May be a poor experiment?
> Poor surveys are less reliable even than qualitative studies. With the poor
> surveys we have "garbage in, garbage out." No use.
>
> Many researchers think that developing the survey questionnaire is like
> making questions from thin air. These researchers fool themselves that they
> use a very powerful method, while in fact they have no control over data
> quality because of incompetence.
>
> Every time we make a survey, we make social science research. We need to
> be experts in the social sciences. At least a Ph.D. in a social science
> discipline that has a good track record of using the survey research
> design. Like sociology, political science, marketing research, etc. All the
> rest is perfunctory, and most often leads to "garbage in, garbage out." The
> advent of Survey Monkey (and many others) made every third-grader a
> pollster. And everyone claims they make research. I am sorry... We should
> do better and teach the kids better.
>
> The current discussion on survey methods highlights the nebulous
> boundaries of design research. What is design research? Is there design
> research? When do we make design research? What should be the education and
> training of a design researcher? And so on, and on, and on...Or, we are
> making social science research without even realizing this? There are so
> many examples.
>
> There is a simple rule: every time we study the relationship between any
> kind of object/phenomenon and society/groups/individuals, we make social
> science. Every time we talk with/interview/observe humans, we make social
> science. Now let's see what remains for design research. So much about
> design research:) Let's change the name of the discussion list:)
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Lubomir
>
> Lubomir Popov, Ph.D., FDRS, IDEC, CSP
> Professor, School of Family and Consumer Sciences
> American Culture Studies Affiliated Faculty
> Bowling Green State University, OH, U.S.A.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
> research in Design <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of
> [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 8:32 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: - Call for participation in International survey on Design
> expertise
>
> > On 20 Jun 2018, at 3:13 pm, Ali Ilhan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Surveys might be problematic in your context, but they have their
> > uses. For some types of research questions, they are the best tool we
> > have. For some others, they are an absolute pain in the neck. You can
> > say the same thing easily for experiments, interviews, ethnography etc.
>
> Without extending this discussion much further than I have already, I will
> just say that I think your ecumenical approach underestimates the extent of
> the validity crisis in survey research. It’s not a case of horses for
> courses. Some horses are born lame and are best euthanised.
>
> David
> --
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:47:10 +0200
> From: Francois Nsenga <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: - Call for participation in International survey on Design
> expertise
>
> Dear Lubomir and All
>
> Since we obviously don't belong to the domain of the Social Sciences, is
> there then a method or methods that would be more specifically useful to
> dealing with the phenomenon of humans - and some non-human entities -
> devising and interacting with artifacts?
>
> True, " every time we study the relationship between any kind of
> object/phenomenon and society/groups/individuals, we make social science.
> Every time we talk with/interview/observe humans, we make social science."
>
> But what about if we leave - and sub-contract to respective experts - the
> social, the mechanical, and the environmental aspects involved in the
> phenomenon, and we, designers, deal only with the interaction? Wouldn't
> that be enough a specific field for our expertise? Wouldn't that be " what
> remains for design research"?
> Regards,
> François, Rwanda
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:27 AM Lubomir Savov Popov <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > (...)
> >
> > Every time we make a survey, we make social science research. We need to
> > be experts in the social sciences. At least a Ph.D. in a social science
> > discipline that has a good track record of using the survey research
> > design. Like sociology, political science, marketing research, etc. All
> the
> > rest is perfunctory, and most often leads to "garbage in, garbage out."
> The
> > advent of Survey Monkey (and many others) made every third-grader a
> > pollster. And everyone claims they make research. I am sorry... We should
> > do better and teach the kids better.
> >
> > The current discussion on survey methods highlights the nebulous
> > boundaries of design research. What is design research? Is there design
> > research? When do we make design research? What should be the education
> and
> > training of a design researcher? And so on, and on, and on...Or, we are
> > making social science research without even realizing this? There are so
> > many examples.
> >
> > There is a simple rule: every time we study the relationship between any
> > kind of object/phenomenon and society/groups/individuals, we make social
> > science. Every time we talk with/interview/observe humans, we make social
> > science. Now let's see what remains for design research.
> > "
> >
>
>
>
> >
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:53:36 +0200
> From: Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Domains of Design Knowledge
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> Every now and then, we seem to enter a time warp, repeating old
> conversations and rebuilding boundaries or divisions that make little
> sense. I was astonished to read Francois’s assertion that “we obviously
> don't belong to the domain of the Social Sciences.” I don’t see why this
> should be the case. Francois himself contradicts this in the rest of the
> sentence, where he writes: “is there then a method or methods that would be
> more specifically useful to dealing with the phenomenon of humans - and
> some non-human entities - devising and interacting with artifacts?”
>
> The study of how human beings interact with anything is a social science.
> Many aspects of devising artifacts do not involve the social sciences — but
> studying how human beings interact with artifacts does fall within the
> domain of the social sciences. It is the nature of design to cross the
> boundaries of disciplines — for this reason, design research must also
> cross the boundaries of disciplines.
>
> It may not be necessary to understand the social sciences to learn and
> master typography or automobile design. If we want to understand how people
> perceive and understand the printed page, how they digest information and
> develop that information into knowledge, however, we move into such fields
> as communication, psychology, and education. These are social sciences. To
> understand why one steering system might work better than another, we need
> to understand something about ergonomics, and if we want to know whether
> (or why) one dashboard and instrument panel layout works better than
> another, we need to consider many issues, some physical or physiological,
> some psychological, and some social.
>
> Richard Buchanan’s 2001 article “Design Research and the New Learning”
> considers some of these issues and demonstrates the relationship between
> different kinds of design and the domains they involve. If we design a tax
> system or a customer service system, we work in applied social science.
> That is precisely why some nations and businesses now involve designers
> from different fields in designing the systems they use to interact with
> their citizens, clients, and customers.
>
> You can find a copy of the Buchanan article here:
>
> https://www.ida.liu.se/divisions/hcs/ixs/material/DesResMeth09/Theory/01-
> buchanan.pdf
>
> In the early 1990s, I began to work on a taxonomy of design knowledge
> domains (Friedman 2012:144). This is not a perfect scheme — it probably
> says as much about what I don’t know as it says about the design field.
> Even so, the taxonomy and its later iterations also demonstrate how the
> kinds of things that we work with and design cross the boundaries of
> disciplines. Some designers do not engage with the social sciences. Other
> designers must.
>
> You can find the article containing the “Strategic Design Taxonomy: Design
> Knowledge Domains” here:
>
> https://www.academia.edu/2508775/Friedman._2012._Models_of_Design
>
> The different kinds of things that we design and the different kinds of
> design we practice to design them involve the human professions and
> services, the creative and applied arts, and technology and engineering.
> The research that informs these different fields therefore may draw on the
> natural sciences, the humanities and liberal arts, or the social and
> behavioral sciences in different configurations (see Friedman 2012:
> 148-149).
>
> The challenges of design and design research in a complex era mean that
> different kinds of designers require different ranges of skill and
> expertise. On a research list dedicated to doctoral education, I’m
> uncomfortable with assertions that we have no need for expertise in domains
> that we need if we are to understand the challenges we face.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> References
>
> Buchanan, Richard. 2001. “Design Research and the New Learning.” Design
> Issues, Volume 17, Number 4 (Autumn 2001), pp. 3-23.
>
> Friedman, Ken. 2012. “Models of Design: Envisioning a Future for Design
> Education.” Visible Language, Vol. 46, No. 1/2, pp. 128-151.
>
> Ken Friedman, Ph.D., D.Sc. (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-
> design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email
> [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/
> KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 13:41:32 +0200
> From: Francois Nsenga <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Domains of Design Knowledge
>
> Dear Ken
> I fully appreciate the corrective remark in your post. Indeed, " It is the
> nature of design to cross the boundaries of disciplines (...) design
> research must (...) cross the boundaries of disciplines". Design research
> is, or ought to be transdisciplinary. I expand on this in:* "*Design
> Studies: A Transdisciplinary Perspective". A chapter in
> Transdisciplinarity. Theory and Practice. Edited by Basarab Nicolescu.
> Creskill, NJ. (USA): Hampton Press, Inc., 2008, pp. 237-244
> <https://www.academia.edu/4210787/Design_Studies_A_
> Transdisciplinary_Perspective._A_chapter_in_Transdisciplinarity._Theory_
> and_Practice._Edited_by_Basarab_Nicolescu._Creskill_
> NJ._USA_Hampton_Press_Inc._2008_pp._237-244>
> )
> It is thus true that, in such wide, complex, and still novel trend of
> transdisciplinarity, "Some designers do not engage with the social
> sciences." But "Other designers must". Just like it is the case with all
> other domains of knowledge, all depends on what precise phenomenon of
> artifactual interaction one is dealing with.
>
> What thus is clear, at least in my mind for now, is that the discipline of
> design ought to be dealing with multiple inputs, and not with inputs from
> only one academic discipline. And even much clearer, the difficulty of one
> individual, fully trained or not in a given domain, social or any other, to
> propose complete, reliable, useful to study the interaction with artifacts
> in various contexts of their use.
> Please allow me to say, therefore in my turn, that I find this following
> assertion of yours a little bit contradictory also, with what we seem to
> agree upon above. You say: " The study of how human beings interact with
> anything is a social science (...) studying how human beings interact with
> artifacts does fall within the domain of the social sciences". In my view
> of a non PhD and non academic, unless one is biased or somehow limited by
> academy administrative categorizations, the study of interaction of humans
> and their artifacts is NOT ONLY social sciences! It ought to be drawing on
> many fields of knowledge, as you yourself imply in all the cases you
> mention as examples.
> What I consider the expertise of a 'designer', therefore, it is not to be
> expert in anyone of all existing knowledge domains, social, maths, or hard
> sciences. Rather, we ought to be developing expertise in the capacity to
> IDENTIFY - and not necessarily mining ourselves - the various elements of
> knowledge pertinent and needed to study a particular artifactual
> interaction on hand, and developing ability to understand and put up
> assemblies of data drawn from those various domains in order to propose
> better artifactual interactions.
> Perhaps it is my poor English, but far from me asserting that we,
> designers, "have no need for expertise in domains..." such as social
> sciences, or any other domain. for that matter.
> Best regards,
> François
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:53 AM Ken Friedman <
> [log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > Every now and then, we seem to enter a time warp, repeating old
> > conversations and rebuilding boundaries or divisions that make little
> > sense. I was astonished to read Francois’s assertion that “we obviously
> > don't belong to the domain of the Social Sciences.” I don’t see why this
> > should be the case. Francois himself contradicts this in the rest of the
> > sentence, where he writes: “is there then a method or methods that would
> be
> > more specifically useful to dealing with the phenomenon of humans - and
> > some non-human entities - devising and interacting with artifacts?”
> >
> > The study of how human beings interact with anything is a social science.
> > Many aspects of devising artifacts do not involve the social sciences —
> but
> > studying how human beings interact with artifacts does fall within the
> > domain of the social sciences. It is the nature of design to cross the
> > boundaries of disciplines — for this reason,design research must also
> cross
> > the boundaries of disciplines.
> >
> > It may not be necessary to understand the social sciences to learn and
> > master typography or automobile design. If we want to understand how
> people
> > perceive and understand the printed page, how they digest information and
> > develop that information into knowledge, however, we move into such
> fields
> > as communication, psychology, and education. These are social sciences.
> To
> > understand why one steering system might work better than another, we
> need
> > to understand something about ergonomics, and if we want to know whether
> > (or why) one dashboard and instrument panel layout works better than
> > another, we need to consider many issues, some physical or physiological,
> > some psychological, and some social.
> >
> > Richard Buchanan’s 2001 article “Design Research and the New Learning”
> > considers some of these issues and demonstrates the relationship between
> > different kinds of design and the domains they involve. If we design a
> tax
> > system or a customer service system, we work in applied social science.
> > That is precisely why some nations and businesses now involve designers
> > from different fields in designing the systems they use to interact with
> > their citizens, clients, and customers.
> >
> > You can find a copy of the Buchanan article here:
> >
> >
> > https://www.ida.liu.se/divisions/hcs/ixs/material/
> DesResMeth09/Theory/01-buchanan.pdf
> >
> > In the early 1990s, I began to work on a taxonomy of design knowledge
> > domains (Friedman 2012:144). This is not a perfect scheme — it probably
> > says as much about what I don’t know as it says about the design field.
> > Even so, the taxonomy and its later iterations also demonstrate how the
> > kinds of things that we work with and design cross the boundaries of
> > disciplines. Some designers do not engage with the social sciences. Other
> > designers must.
> >
> > You can find the article containing the “Strategic Design Taxonomy:
> Design
> > Knowledge Domains” here:
> >
> > https://www.academia.edu/2508775/Friedman._2012._Models_of_Design
> >
> > The different kinds of things that we design and the different kinds of
> > design we practice to design them involve the human professions and
> > services, the creative and applied arts, and technology and engineering.
> > The research that informs these different fields therefore may draw on
> the
> > natural sciences, the humanities and liberal arts, or the social and
> > behavioral sciences in different configurations (see Friedman 2012:
> > 148-149).
> >
> > The challenges of design and design research in a complex era mean that
> > different kinds of designers require different ranges of skill and
> > expertise. On a research list dedicated to doctoral education, I’m
> > uncomfortable with assertions that we have no need for expertise in
> domains
> > that we need if we are to understand the challenges we face.
> >
> > Yours,
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > References
> >
> > Buchanan, Richard. 2001. “Design Research and the New Learning.” Design
> > Issues, Volume 17, Number 4 (Autumn 2001), pp. 3-23.
> >
> > Friedman, Ken. 2012. “Models of Design: Envisioning a Future for Design
> > Education.” Visible Language, Vol. 46, No. 1/2, pp. 128-151.
> >
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:31:40 +0100
> From: Patrick Brandon <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: DNR PGR Conference call for papers
>
> The PhD student members of TRACEY Drawing Research Network Loughborough
> University are pleased to announce a call for papers.
>
> PGR Drawing Research Conference 11th September 2018
> Conveners: TRACEY School Research Members, Loughborough University
>
> The organisers would like to invite proposals, from PhD researchers, for a
> fifteen-minute presentation, which introduces and analyses the key points
> of their approach to practice led drawing research.
>
> The event aims to provide a space for discussion, dissemination and the
> exchange of knowledge regarding practice led research, where drawing forms
> a defining part of research across a diverse range of practices – e.g.
> painting, sculpture, printmaking, installation, audio-visual, music, text,
> language, the performative.
>
> The call suggests the following as possible themes, prompts, and
> provocations, which will act as starting points for group discussion:
>
> How do you reconcile the relationship between drawing practice and drawing
> theory?
>
> What role does drawing play at each stage of your research methodology?
>
> How does thought process relate to drawing process in your practice?
>
> In what way might drawing be used as an analytic tool in terms of practice
> and in assessing outcome?
>
> Please submit to: [log in to unmask] a 300word (max) abstract for
> your presentation, which should aim to generate debate around the place and
> use of drawing within practice led research.
>
>
> Deadline for submission 30th June 2018
>
>
> Please include the following information:
> Author(s)
> Institutional Affiliation (if appropriate)
> 300-word Proposal
> DRN in the subject header
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 19:06:21 +0100
> From: Hayley Alter <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: INVITATION FOR PARTICIPATION: Ethics through Design Conversation
> @ DRS2018 Limerick Thurs 28 Jun, 14:00-15:30
>
> Let’s talk about ethics and responsible research innovation, let’s play
> with participatory design tools, let’s get together around good experiences
> and issues of concern, let’s define together Ethics through Design!
>
> The IsITethical? team at Lancaster University (www.isitethical.eu) are
> facilitating a DRS2018 Conversation together with Tech For Good
> (www.techforgood.live) and Trilateral Research (trilateralresearch.co.uk)
> about using participatory design practices for discussing ethics in
> technology and data management systems.
>
> Conversation Rationale: http://www.drs2018limerick.
> org/event/cn19-ethics-through-design
>
> Time and location:
> CN19: Ethics through Design
> Thursday 28 June
> 14:00 - 15:30
> [UL] Schumann SG19
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> http://www.drs2018limerick.org/Design shapes our daily lives, influencing
> how we interact with each other and with our environment. When at its best,
> design is a powerful catalyst for change. DRS2018 Limerick, invites
> designers to explore these relationships across an exciting four
> day conference from 25th–28th June 2018.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 20:24:35 +0200
> From: Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Domains of Design Knowledge
>
> Dear Francois,
>
> You wrote, "the study of interaction of humans and their artifacts is NOT
> ONLY social sciences! It ought to be drawing on many fields of knowledge.”
>
> You are quite right.
>
> I said that in the second half of my note. I should have gone back to edit
> the first half — I did not use the word “only,” but I forgot to add the
> rest. Figure 4 (Friedman 2012: 148-149) in the article “Models of Design”
> make it clear that we agree on this.
>
> https://www.academia.edu/2508775/Friedman._2012._Models_of_Design
>
> The question of how to deal with domains of knowledge involves too many
> issues to discuss in a short note. These issues are situated in a specific
> context, and they depend on the background, experience, predilections, and
> interests of each researcher or designer. That’s too much to address in a
> short post, so I’ll stop here.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman, Ph.D., D.Sc. (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-
> design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email
> [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/
> KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of PHD-DESIGN Digest - 20 Jun 2018 to 21 Jun 2018 (#2018-151)
> *****************************************************************
>
--
*Zip-Scene Conference on Immersive Storytelling
<http://mome.hu/en/aktu%C3%A1lis/1704-zip-scene-conference-analogue-and-digital-immersive-environments-call-for-papers>,
**8-10
November, Budapest @Moholy-Nagy University of Art and Design, Budapest*
*Interested in performing arts&game design&new tech? Check out my blog:
zip-scene.com <http://zip-scene.com> or for random updates follow it on
Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/zipsceneonline/>.*
Telefon: +36 70 383 28 47 // Skype: zoldjadviga
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
