Hi Chris,

It's an interesting question as to whether, as you say, the 'actors are core researchers'.

An alternative perspective is that they are solely a component of the data gathering experimental process. In that case, the researchers' concern about the functioning of the actors is purely of accuracy - whether they do their job of replication and representation to the precision necessary for the researchers to gather accurate enough data to understand the failures (a research outcome).

Another perspective, (and particularly if the research outcomes from the project are not the issue of primary interest - as it appears) one might better view the process as primarily a design activity and not in essence research. As you say ' It's very much a design/prototyping exercise underpinned by the actors' ability to work rigorously' This looks like one of those projects that is primarily a design exercise trying to fly the flag of research by adding the term 'research' in as many ways as possible to reshape perceptions. This is a bit like the way the term 'design' has been added to anything and everything in the past?

Both of the above viewpoints interpret the role of the actors in a simpler and more accurate fashion than trying to see them as simultaneously researcher/actor/designer. Or do you see there is a defining and overriding benefit of taking a new position and interpreting them differently. Scientists have been dealing with things with effect as the working media of a discipline (think ergonomics and human factors) for several decades without problems. This seems to be a classic human factors problem - like managing the interfaces of a nuclear power station or managing military situations.

Thoughts?

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 Chris Rust
Sent: Tuesday, 16 December 2008 9:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Inventing Research Methods

Nicola Morelli wrote:
> perhaps I'm a really messy researcher.

Well you are not the only one Nicola, I have another example.

Karen Sorensen, a facilities manager at Guys and St Thomas Hospital in
London, uses actors in research to facilitate the development of better
ways of working in the hospital - helping staff to understand people who
come to the hospital and how to deal with them in a supportive/helpful way.

The actors are the core researchers - they interview patients and staff
to build up a picture of the problems they experience, then they
"perform" the problems for the staff who discuss how they might improve
the situation. The actors then perform the new proposed method of
working so that everybody can see how it might work out in action and
rethink etc. It's very much a design/prototyping exercise underpinned by
the actors' ability to work rigorously in interviewing/observing
stakeholders and reproducing their experiences in an accurate and
affective way.

In the hospital's day to day development it's sufficient that they do
the work well, but if this was being done in a PhD or other formal
research we would need some way to make these performances part of the
narrative of the research - my description may interest you in this
method, but it does not help you understand whether the actors were
doing it in a rigorous and effective way - for that we have to examine
the material of the research.

That might not be purely the performances, presumably on video. We might
have to connect it to what happened in the stakeholder discussions. We
would also need to know how the hospital staff experienced the process
and both of these have an affective component. A lot of the debate in
the field of performance and theatre is about how to record and notate
performances - it's easy to record them superficially on video but that
doesn't capture the experience of being there.

The fallback position is to say that social scientists of different
kinds have been dealing with similar problems for many years so what's
the problem? My concern is that we are dealing with these materials not
as phenomena but as the working media of our discipline. We are
particularly interested in how they can be skilfully manipulated which
requires us to engage directly with their affective nature and our
capacity to effect that affect.

best wishes from Sheffield
Chris