 |
 |
Terry, et al I think the problem with complex systems science comes down to the interpretation of results. There is of course the problem of nominal interpretation when defining the input to any statistical method (Garbage in-Garbage out). More importantly, it seems to me, is the fact that you must adequately account for human interpretation of the outcomes from systematically proscribed analysis, whether involving multiple feedback loops or not. While, such feedbacks might or might not have some corrective validity, it comes down to the question of whether you can recognize the relevance of the outcome to the variables you can act on and that you can believe in. This, puts it back into the realm of communication between active stakeholders and whatever shared understandings they can reach. It is ultimately a case of human interpretation. Similarly, the act of visualization or its almost instantaneous interpretation requires the construction or deconstruction (I prefer the words "blending" and "unblending") of recognizable elements and relationships . The resultant mental image is a coherent (not just visual) network of contributing information. It is holistic only in that it has referential objectivity that affords opportunities for selective interpretation and transformation. In sum, it doesn't make sense to deny the human limitations in dealing with information - whether posited through systems or other recognizable forms. To much belief in nominal processing doesn't cut it. Don't drink that kool-aid! Chuck On Apr 8, 2010, at 7:53 PM, Terence Love wrote: > Dear Meredith, > Thank you for your message. You express exactly the general state of > mental > play of the design field on this issue . > " Visuals ... have a huge potential when we are talking about > understanding > complex problems" and "... *may* [my emphasis] be more than just > representations", Visuals *may* "... have the potential for predicting > directions or outcomes" > > This has been the speculation for decades. All of these are > tentative and > appear as yet to be without evidence that visuals can actually do > these > things. I'm wondering if they are simply wishful thinking and false > claims? > > A test: "In complex design situations (multi-feedback loop and more > than 3 > dimensions) is there ANY evidence visuals can accurately predict the > behaviour of dynamic design outcomes? > > If anyone has any evidence, I'd be very interested to see it as it > would > open up a significant new area of design education and practice. It > would > also open the door to Visual Design being able to start to justify > claims > that design thinking approaches apply to more complex areas such as > business > strategy and other real world complex design situations. > > Best wishes, > Terry > > -----Original Message----- > From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and > related > research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Constanza > Miranda > Sent: Friday, 9 April 2010 1:03 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Are visual approaches to design outdated? > > Hi Terence, > > Actually I'm doing research in this area. Visuals, which is one of the > knowledge evidence in design research, in my opinion, have a huge > potential > when we are talking about understanding complex problems regarding the > design interaction not just in the computer, but as Meredith Davis > mentions, > outside of them. Complexity regarding: access to particular > communities, a > diversity of disciplines working together or just networked > individuals. > This is the new scenario that design educators should acknowledge. > Something > more than a "trend", but a new conception of the discipline. We can > go back > to Sapient's experience models, that though, they were born for rapid > business cycles, they can be a referent for the applied world in > complex and > interdisciplinary areas like public service. Visuals may be more > than just > representations. They might be used as models [simulations or > theoretical], > something that Hugh Dubberly has been addressing since around 2001, > if not > earlier. In this form, they have the potential for predicting > directions or > outcomes and, depending if the analysis is driven by statistical or > more > qualitative approaches, they might be more or less reliable. > > Best, > > Davis, Meredith > 2008 Toto, I'Ve Got a Feeling we'Re Not in Kansas Anymore. > Interactions > 15(5):28-34 > > > > On 8 April 2010 09:51, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi David, >> First a big thanks for the pointer to Bob Horn's work. >> The fundamental issue to be addressed in any kind of design (and >> often not >> addressed by graphic designers) is accurately predicting the >> behaviour of >> the outcome. For example, how does one know if a poster and a public > health >> promotion program will achieve its aim of reducing smoking by 50%? >> Why did >> or didn't the design produce the right outcome? To ask these >> questions >> about >> behaviour is central to design as a profession and to development of >> suitable design methods, design processes and design education. >> Many early >> engineering design methods to predict behaviour were visual. With > increased >> complexity, they ran out of steam which is why engineering >> designers now >> use >> different methods that primarily use visual for input and final >> presentation. >> >> Bob Horn's work is tremendously useful and interesting. Thank you for >> reminding me about it. I remember his hypertext book in the late >> 80s.Bob >> Horn's visuals and visual language approach however are not about >> predicting behaviour of designs in the manner of a design method, nor >> primarily about predicting the outcomes of complexity (many feedback >> loops). >> Their main role is knowledge mapping to make complicated >> information >> (more >> bits) easier to access and think about. They do this in part by >> acting as >> an external memory store in the manner similar to that proposed by >> Tony >> Buzan some years ago with mind maps. They are primarily visual >> representations of knowledge content rather than design methods that >> predict >> behaviour. Similar, though less attractive approaches were >> developed in > the >> 60-s and 70s in the 'for beginners' comic books (e.g. Foucault for >> Beginners >> and Marx for Beginners etc), soft systems CATWOE maps, criteria >> maps(which >> echo critical path maps), logic maps, decision tree maps, group >> decision >> making support diagrams and flow diagrams. >> Horn's description of the Cognome visual language project and >> problems it >> faces, identifies the same limitations and problems as above >> > http://stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/recent/VUscnrioVisualLanguage.pdf<http://stanfo > rd.edu/%7Erhorn/a/recent/VUscnrioVisualLanguage.pdf>except he >> hasn't yet added the behaviour prediction problem as his aims as a >> design >> method don't reach that far... yet. It is, however, implicit in >> his top >> long range goal. >> For improving the quality of design activity, the paper on his site >> that >> really made me sit up was the one of images that identify what we >> don't >> know >> > http://stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/recent/artclUnknowns.pdf<http://stanford.edu/ > %7 > Erhorn/a/recent/artclUnknowns.pdf> >> A paper that might be useful for design research PhD students is on >> how to >> conduct research to get little or no effect >> > http://stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/recent/artclHowtoGetLttleorNoEffc.pdf<http://st > anford.edu/%7Erhorn/a/recent/artclHowtoGetLttleorNoEffc.pdf> >> Amazing. Horn's recent papers and diagrams are at >> > http://stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/recent/<http://stanford.edu/%7Erhorn/a/recent/ > > >> Best wishes and thanks again, >> Terry >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and >> related >> research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >> David >> Sless >> Sent: Thursday, 8 April 2010 3:14 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: Are visual approaches to design outdated? >> >> Terry et al, >> A provocative question. I would suggest a resounding NO. I think we >> are >> just >> beginning to scratch the surface of possibilities in visual >> approaches. > The >> work of Bob Horn just mentioned is an example of this. I think we >> are at a >> very early but highly productive stage in this kind of work. Look at >> argumentation mapping as another example. Or the growing uses of MRI. >> >> BTW, in talking about complex systems, stakeholders, relationships, >> feedback >> loops and multidimensional problems you are using some of the prime >> metaphors of our time. >> >> David >> -- >> >> blog: www.communication.org.au/dsblog >> web: http://www.communication.org.au >> > > > > -- > Constanza S. Miranda M. > PhD Student NCSU-Design > www.innovacionsocial.cl > > "Develop Design, Design to Develop"