A different perspective:
https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/making-design-theory
by the way,
I wonder if we should take it for granted
that the division into basic, applied, clinical
is meaningful in all fields of 'design research'
(sorry if such has already been mentioned)
Best regards
Henrik Svarrer Larsen
PhD (tech)/ MA / BEd
Universitetslektor, Interaktionsdesign
K3, Malmö Universitet
Omar Sosa Tzec skrev den 2020-03-20 20:29:
> Hello all,
>
> Thank you for replying and providing reference material, I'll be happy
> to take a look at it.
>
> There's another message about the new book by Peter Gall Krogh and
> Ilpo Koskinen. I have the impression that this book relates to the
> question I asked above. In the Routledge Companion to Design Research,
> two chapters motivated me to ask the question: "Four cultures of
> analysis in design research" by Koskinen, and "Prototypes and
> prototyping in design research" by Wensveen and Matthews.
>
> And just recently, I came across "Ways of Drifting—Five Methods of
> Experimentation in Research Through Design" by Krogh et al. I find
> this paper interesting and useful. It makes me think that instead of
> figuring out the boundaries of basic research, I could say that one
> way of understanding delight (my research topic) is by following the
> experimentation approach named probing. This is one of the five types
> of knowledge production through design experimentation identified by
> Krogh et al.
>
> In this same paper, the authors refer to Zimmerman and Forlizzi's
> paper "The role of design artifacts in design theory construction."
> Krogh et al. bring into their discussion the two approaches of
> research-through-design: the philosophical and the grounded approach.
> I concluded that it's possible to relate basic design research to the
> philosophical research approach and applied research to the grounded
> research approach.
>
> Part of my confusion, as I see it now, has to do with the urge of
> finding a "proper" research approach. This notion of probing makes me
> feel reassured that it's possible to engage in design practices while
> conducting basic design research without feeling the urge to justify
> its disconnection with wicked-problems. And that part I mention about
> the connectin with pedagogy has to do with how I've seen basic
> research works in sciences. Eventually, significant basic research
> becomes something that shapes instruction. And, not everything is
> theory. In science, methods (formulations that come in the form of
> equations, algorithms, and procedures) are taught with the expectation
> that students will use them to conduct applied research later. I was
> wondering what the equivalent for design is, as those "basic"
> methods/formulations that I've seen in many research discussions are
> those borrowed from other disciplines. For example, I just saw a new
> post talking about "design anthropology" (if I remember it right).
>
> I know this and other similar questions are difficult to answer.
> Hence, I appreciate the work of design scholars. Not sure if this has
> to do with design as a young discipline or something that needs to
> demonstrate how distinct it is from other fields while following
> conventional lines of knowledge dissemination, production, and
> validation. Again, thanks for your messages. I hope you're safe and
> healthy.
>
> ---- Here are the links to the material I mentioned above ----
> * https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-81-322-2232-3_4
> *
> https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Companion-to-Design-Research-1st-Edition/Rodgers-Yee/p/book/9780415706070
> *
> https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/artifact/article/view/3915
> * https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030378950
>
>
> Omar Sosa-Tzec, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor of Art and Design\
> University of Michigan – Ann Arbor
> *
> https://stamps.umich.edu/creative-work/stories/omar_sosa_tzec_delight_design_and_the_good_life
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:04 PM David Sless <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Ken and all,
>>
>> I agree with Ken. In our own little field of information design I have
>> encouraged both basic and what Ken calls clinical research. I also
>> recognise some research undertaken in, on, and through design as
>> basic. In the latter I would include the traditional craft knowledge
>> accumulated over centuries of practice in such areas as graphic design
>> and typography. . Some of which is basic.
>>
>> Pointing to some of our basic research at CRI, I would mention Ruth
>> Shrensky’s PhD thesis on the Ontology of Communication, and Rob
>> Wiseman’s PhD thesis onThe Development of Ideas About Communication in
>> European Thought. Both projects were influenced by their work at CRI.
>> I would also include my own work on design methods in information
>> design, and my work on semiotics.
>>
>> Most of our work, however, is what Ken would call ‘clinical’.
>>
>> 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
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
