Comments - Theme 5

Links to my comments on other students blogs:

1. ixxzw
2. dm2572lisa
3. reb2572
4. elindm2572
5. u1ifqcuc
6. cloudsong223
7. fromplatotocasestudies
8. tmmkappa
9. denise-theoryandmethod
10. remarkableathenianyouth

Post: Theme 5 - Design research

This theme was quite different than the others. We only had lectures and no seminar. I felt that the lack of having a seminar will make this post different than my previous posts after the theme. I felt that after this theme, comparing to the previous themes, I only have my own reflection to base my knowledge and perception on. I think this have disadvantages since we did not get the chance to discuss our opinions with others therefore I’ll write this reflection mostly based on the lectures and some own thoughts. I do not feel that I have gained as much since this themes pre posting as I have on the first themes. I have also noticed them being less and less philosophical than the first themes.

Haibo Lee discussed the process from having an idea to developing a finished product. From his lecture the main point as I perceived was that the most important thing is to define a problem, after having done that finding a solution is the easy part. In fact he said you should put 90% effort into finding and defining the problem and the last 10% on coming up with a solution. He later on continued by talking about how you should reason when choosing, validating,evaluating and marketing your idea. I felt his guidelines were pretty straight forward and it wasn’t hard to grasp at all, mostly since it is not completely new information to me. Good lecture with good points and knowledge directly towards our engineering field.

In the other lecture with Anders Lundström he discussed the difference between two types of prototyping; industrial research prototyping and design research prototyping. I hard trouble grasping everything from Anders lecture, since it felt a bit unstructured. But what I did understand that I didn’t know earlier is that prototype itself does not have to be made in order to solve anything but they are also there to help gain knowledge. This is primarily applied to when using a design research.

I felt that a seminar for this theme would have been well needed. It would have been fun knowing how others perceived the lectures to be and the pre assignment, since I feel feelings could have differed which makes the discussion more interesting.  Overall I felt this theme to be very interesting since it can be related to our engineering field, and could very much be something that I might use in a work situation.

Pre Theme 5 - Design Research - Part 2

PART II

1. What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?

Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space - Fernaeus & Tholander: Data collected from observing the children’s actions when using the prototype.  

Differentiated Driving Range - Lundström: Uses multiple methods such as conducting an state of the art analysis in the beginning, interviewing participants, analyzing blogs and forums.

2. Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?

I think that practical design work can be considered as a knowledge contribution. The creators ideas are a part of the design and the design research could lead to further development through other researches. Making it a knowledge contribution.

3. Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?

When designing within a research project the method used is usually carefully chosen. Depending on the type of research you can also adapt your design intentions. It could be user centered meaning putting the user in focus when designing or self centered meaning putting yourself in the shoes of the user. I believe that this type of design and general design differ on this type of design being more focused on the functionality aspect of the design rather on mostly fulfilling a sensation as general design does.

4. Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?

I believe it can be replicable. Although you have to take into account the researchers own knowledge on how a good objectified research is done. It also depends on the type of methods being used. I mean if the research is user centered then it can be replicable, but if the research is self centered that is not possible. And I believe this leads to further development of the tech domain.

5. Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?

The design driven research is qualitative. It provides options of conducting the research through observations providing a deeper understanding and more accurate conclusions. This research also strives to make products as good as they could possibly be and focus is more on the functionality and testing. Meanwhile other research practice feels more about contributing with knowledge and information.

SOURCES:

Fernaeus, Y. & Tholander, J. (2006). Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space - Fernaeus & Tholander. Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University.

Lundström, A. (2014). Differentiated Driving Range - Lundström. Media Technology and Interaction Design. KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Pre Theme 5 - Design research - Part 1

PART I

1. How can media technologies be evaluated?

Media technology can be evaluated in different ways. I think that it’s important to take into account the type and purpose of the technology that you are going to evaluate. In the article by Réhman, Sun, Liu and Li they had a prototype which they evaluated through having user tests. They also focused on other aspects by having three keywords as a point of view; effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction. It's a good way to evaluate media technologies, since the artifact rarely affects only one aspect of the user.

2. What role will prototypes play in research?

Prototypes have a big role in researches on new or developed media technologies. Prototypes have the advantages of giving the designer and developer a chance to try if their ideas are understood by the future users. It gives possibilities of detecting new errors or misinterpretations that can be later on fixed and prevented having in the final product. Prototypes could also open up to new idea. Sometimes products with an initial purpose could suddenly show that it can also have a new purpose for a user that wasn’t taken under consideration when designing.

3. Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

Proof of concept is a demonstration through documented evidence to show that a potential product can be successful. This concept helps the developer to minimize the potential errors in the final product and lead to a difference maker for success or failure.

4. What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

Prototypes are samples of the final product, it’s not finished and can differ from the final product. Its characteristics are to give the users an idea of what it could be and how it could work to be able to try the product and evaluate it before final production. When making a prototype there are limitations such as expenses for materials or workers and time limits. In prototypes alternative materials can be used to lower expenses and when working on projects you often have time limits and can’t do everything you would like to make it perfect. This could affect users when testing the prototype and create limitations on their experience of the potential product.

5. How can design research be communicated/presented?

Design research can be presented by having data collected through e.g. questionnaires or interviews that are later on analyzed and summarized. You could also add visual explanations, such as images or videos, helping the readers understand. These types of methods can be very useful.

SOURCES: 
Réhman, S., Sun, J., Liu, L., & Li, H. (2008). Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 10(6), 1022-1033