Dear Tim,
Identifying contradictions is a *process* not a list of publications.
The process is to take every sentence of a design research publication and
ask whether there is anything from any of the hundreds of design fields or
any other discipline that would contradict it. Is the sentence 'valid' in
general, only valid in its context, or is it perhaps not valid at all?
Design theories and the practical use of design theories abut theories and
products of theories of other disciplines. For multidisciplinary work it's a
problem if abutting or overlapping theories from different fields are not
coherent.
Example 1:, designing a shared business management information systems
interface becomes unnecessarily complex if the design theories about
readability, legibility and usability are incompatible between the fields of
aesthetic-based interaction design, management information system design,
computer-aided cooperative work and document analysis.
Example2: use of design theories becomes problematic if greater theoretical
depth is needed and the design theories do not align with theories at other
levels of abstraction. For example, design of a layout for a small village
might be undertaken using visual design theory or simple theories of special
balance. If the village is required to have a structure that maximises
its benefits to residents and businesses, or involves new dimensions such as
involving a digital eco-system and active building structures, then the
design theories will need to comport well with theories from a range of
other disciplines.
Example 3: Design of a vehicle interior and interface could be done
purely by interior styling design theories . Improvements to crash
protection standards requires vehicle interior design theories to comport
well with engineering design theories relating to crash protection as well
as a variety of engineering design theories relating to engineering
changes that result from changes for improved crash protection.
A very large number of theories across many realms and disciplines are
coherent as a result of using similar theory models, similar concepts and
similar mathematical representations. This offers many benefits in working
across disciplines.
It implies there are benefits in ensuring design theories similarly align
with theories from other disciplines.
Regards,
Terry
==
Dr Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
PhD, B.A. (Hons) Eng, P.G.C.E
School of Design and Art, Curtin University, Western Australia
Psychology and Social Science, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia
Honorary Fellow, IEED, Management School, Lancaster University, UK
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
[log in to unmask] +61 (0)4 3497 5848
==
-----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 Tim
Smithers
Sent: Thursday, 20 December 2012 7:15 PM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: Testing design theory - Popper's three worlds (was 'design
theorytesting')
Dear Terry,
You say
"One of the widely acknowledged problems across the design
research and design literatures is that design theories are
contradicted by well-established theories in other
disciplines. ..."
I thought I new quite a lot of the design research and design literatures,
but I find myself completely ignorant of these "widely acknowledge
problems." Please could you provide some good pointers to these problems
and their "wide acknowledgement" in these literatures.
Also, please could you identify these "well-established theories in other
disciplines" that contradict design theories, and which design theories they
contradict. Once again, I have to confess to knowing nothing of these.
My ignorance extends to not understanding why it is important for a theory
of designing not to be contradicted by other well-established theories in
other disciplines. So, please could you explain this too. It's not a
condition on theory development that I have come across before, in design
research, nor in other fields I have worked in. So which other disciplines
are we talking about here?
Think of this as a request from a new PhD student in need of some good
pointers and basic explanations from a concerned and supportive supervisor.
Thank you!
Best regards,
Tim
-- who is thinking of doing a refresher PhD, since the one he has looks like
it's worn out.
===============================================================
On Dec 20, 2012, at 05:13 , Terence Love wrote:
> Dear Tim,
>
> One of the widely acknowledged problems across the design research
> and design literatures is that design theories are contradicted by
> well-established theories in other disciplines.
>
> It is almost effortless to identify errors and invalid aspects of
> individual design theories using material from other fields. Clearly,
> whatever testing strategies are used for design theories, they are
> typically not effective.
>
> Popper's Three World model points to a way forward to resolve this
> problem and improve the testing of design theories.
>
> 1. First, test any new theory to confirm:
> a) Its internal theoretical consistency
> b) Its lack of contradiction by related theories in other
fields
> c) Its coherence across all levels of theory (see, Love,
> 2000 - meta-theoretical analysis tool*)
>
> 2. Second, test the theory to confirm:
> a) All predictions made on the basis of the theory align
with
> dynamic and static real world outcomes
> b) Lack of contradiction of the theory and its predictions
by any
> evidence of dynamic and static real world situations
> c) Predictions from the theory are coherent with evidence in
dynamic
> and static real world situations in other fields
>
> 3. Third, test the theory to confirm:
> a) All predictions made on the basis of the theory make
sense
> subjectively
> b) Lack of contradiction of the theory and its predictions
by any
> subjective mental constructs
> c) Predictions from the theory are coherent with subjective
> understanding of other fields
>
> The reasons for doing the tests of 1a-1c first are A) they are cheap
> and relatively fast; B) they are usually the reasons why design
> theories fail; and C) they provide the best information for putting
> design theories straight.
>
> My apologies, for not explaining the above in more detail earlier. I'd
> assumed it was self-evident.
>
> You asked for citations to published work. This is an area in which
> reasoning directly currently works better than references because the
> material is limited and much of it is as flawed as design theories
> themselves and appears to be so for the same reasons. I've referenced
> the literature identifying the flaws in design theory in an earlier
> paper. If you want to find them, they are in one or more of the
> pre-prints at
> http://www.love.com.au/PublicationsTLminisite/publications.htm
>
> * Love, T. (2000). Philosophy of Design: a Meta-theoretical Structure
> for Design Theory. Design Studies, 21(3), 293-313.
>
> NB: PhD-Design is a publication and the main way that I publish. if
> anyone finds this post useful, please reference it appropriately as
> authored by myself.
>
> Best wishes,
> Terry
> ==
> Dr Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI PhD, B.A. (Hons) Eng,
> P.G.C.E School of Design and Art, Curtin University, Western Australia
> Psychology and Social Science, Edith Cowan University, Western
> Australia Honorary Fellow, IEED, Management School, Lancaster
> University, UK
>
> PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
> [log in to unmask] +61 (0)4 3497 5848
> ==
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
