Thanks Terry,
Without giving the whole story of the research (you can read the thesis later if you like :o) I would say that the workshops are highly planned to allow the observation of specific scenarios.
These scenarios have been identified through literature review and pilot exercises as being potentially productive strategies in a design collaboration between a designer and an expert user. What was hoped for, if the strategies are valid, was evidence of the surgeon contributing their insight to a relevant design proposal. In each case the surgeon has already proposed an innovation that may help their work but the aim of the design collaboration is to convert that to something refined (as a prototype or specification) that will actually help their work. The focus on mockups comes partly from Ehn and Kyng's work and subsequent developments by a series of researchers at Sheffield Hallam, including Simon Bowen (eg 2009)
The workshops resulted in well-developed design proposals that satisfied the surgeon (and further evaluation was done with other surgeons). However our aim was to understand the process as a collaboration.
The researcher is hampered by being a lone participant observer with high stake in the process and we felt that bringing in an expert panel would give him a more objective view as well as a richer set of insights, The conversation between the panel members and their own collaboration in coming to conclusions about what they are observing appears to work well in this and other similar activities I've been involved with.
The researcher's analysis uses an established approach to coding the data in the video, using an event log, generally as developed by my colleague Nicola Wood (2010), but the addition of a second synchronous video, of the panel discussion, was of great help to him in identifying what is significant in the data and providing some triangulation on his own observations.
One of the problems of the research was that the sessions with surgeons were extremely constrained with really no opportunity for engaging the surgeons in any reflective activity during or outside the workshops. Anybody who has worked with senior medics will know that their time is extremely tight. So the video record is a very valuable resource and it's important to get the most from it.
But we feel that it would be surprising if nobody had done this kind of triangulation before so I'm interested to know if anybody knows of published research that might be a useful source. I'm confident that he can argue for the method from first principles but it would be nice have some backup. Post-hoc review is an established practice in video-ethnography but it's usually a conversation between researcher and subject, rather than with third parties. However I would be surprised if commercial video researchers don't have team reviews of their material.
Also I am a little constrained as some of the design material is commercially confidential at the moment so I'm not describing the design problems here.
Bowen, S. (2009). Design Participation via Artefacts. In Reflections 13 (pp. 103-113). Hogeschool Voor Wetenschap & Kunst Sint-Lucas Architectuur Brussel-Gent.(available online at http://bydesigning.architectuur.sintlucas.wenk.be/rts/rts-resources/reflections13.pdf)
Wood N (2010). A good record? The use of video in practice-led design research. Reflections 13 (Research Training Sessions 2009) pp114-125. Brussels: Sint Lucas School of Architecture (available online at http://nicolawood-design.blogspot.co.uk/p/publications.html) .
very bestChris
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Good question.
>
> A bit that is missing, for me at least. is the info about the problem the
> student is trying to address/question trying to answer/data to be collected
> and analysed/ theory they are trying to confirm, etc.
>
> What you described seems to be exploratory in a sort of undirected way. Is
> that intentional? The main points I precis out of your email are:
>
> 1. Small group of people with relevant experience watch the material and
> discuss what they observed.
>
> 2. This often throws up useful new insights or at least confirms, questions
> or helps to focus my/our own analysis of the material.
>
> 3. Exploring the value of mockups in particular kinds of collaboration.
>
> 4. Exploring new designs of surgical simulators (anatomical models) through
> the use of mockups.
>
> 5. A group of experienced designers view the video material. Their reactions
> and observations were recorded to identify key events and instances
> of "designerly" thinking by participants.
>
> 6. Expert discussion (video) as an analysis of the original video
>
> On just the above info, it seems a bit like 'gather info from lots of
> sources and hope there is something interesting in it'. I'm sure it is more
> specific than that but it's hard to tell from your message how triangulation
> would work, before identifying references about the research methods
>
> In part this is about the focus and validity of the research, i.e. looking
> at the focus of the research and the data collection and analysis:
>
> 1. Is it the activity being videod, i.e the collaboration process?
> 2. Is it the role of the object in the collaboration process (and if so, how
> is that assessed independently of the collaboration process)?
> 3. Is it the role of the designer/facilitator in the collaboration/using the
> mockup - and any combination of these ?
> 4. is it the role of the expert surgeon in the collaboration/using the
> mockup - and any combination of these?
> 5. Is it the interaction between the designer/facilitator and surgeon, and
> mockups ?
> 6. Is the role of the experienced designers in assessing the activities that
> had been videoed?
> 7. The role of the experienced designers in identifying key events and
> designerly thinking (were these also being identified by others, e.g. the
> designer/facilitator?
> 8. Is it the relationship of key events/designerly thinking to
> characteristics of a) the use of the mockups (if the role can be separated
> from the collaboration per se), b) the collaboration process; and c) the
> interaction between designer/facilitator and the expert surgeon?
> 9. Is it to investigate the characteristics of mockups that have particular
> effects to influence a) the collaboration process, b) the interaction
> between designer/facilitator and the expert surgeon, and or c) the
> judgements of the experienced designers ?
> 10. How would you assess the likely effects of bias in assessment, judgement
> and analyses of the different participants and processes?
> 11. How would you avoid bias through the cultures and information processing
> /collaboration and review activities?
> 12. How would you protect against bias?
>
> Apologies if these are a bit clunky.
>
> I can see lots of interesting and really useful research outputs in terms
> of whether and how and why particular types of mockups benefit interactions
> between designers and clients. It's not clear which aspects the student is
> focusing on and that would appear to shape identifying which literature and
> research methodics are relevant. Otherwise, it's likely to be a search
> through the Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research.
>
> Best wishes ,
> Terry
>
> ---
> Dr Terence Love
> PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
>
> Honorary Fellow
> IEED, Management School
> Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
>
> Director,
> Love Services Pty Ltd
> PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
> Western Australia 6030
> Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
> Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
> [log in to unmask]
> --
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
