TOWARDS A MANIFESTO FOR METHODOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTATION IN DESIGN RESEARCH

This paper argues that design research may benefit from investigations, explorations and innovations in the means of conducting and of conveying design research from qualitative methods in the social sciences. The paper examines how inter-disciplinary and intermethodological experimentation as a mode of  knowledge building. At the end of the paper we draw  out a manifesto that proposes potential actions  concerning design research methods which ought to be  applicable for designers and design researchers, but also  for social scientists engaging with the changing nature  of production-related inquiry and critique in which  design increasingly features

Nordic Design Research Conference 2013

AMABILE‟S CONSENSUAL ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE: WHY HAS IT NOT BEEN USED MORE IN DESIGN CREATIVITY RESEARCH?

Amabile‘s Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) has been described as the ―gold standard‖ of creativity assessment; been extensively used within creativity research, and is seen as the most popular method of assessing creative outputs. Its discussion within scholarly research has continued to grow year by year. However, since 1996, a systematic review of the CAT has not been undertaken, and, within design journals, appears not to have occurred, in relation to design, or more broadly, the creative industries in general. Yet, the consensus of domain judges is a prevalent methodology for design education, and professional design awards. This paper presents the findings from a systematic literature review of the CAT covering works from 1982 to 2011. It details key journals and authors publishing or citing CAT related studies, and highlights the limited number of CAT studies within design journals, with suggestions for why this may be the case.

ICDC2012 Glasgow

System Site Patient: A three-tiered methodological approach to constructing holistic understanding of the user through design research

This paper argues that the methods and methodologies used to conduct user research often
provide a singular view of the user. It aims to demonstrate that by combining the strengths
of three different research methodologies into a structured, correlative research platform
we can create a rich, more holistic understanding of our users. Using a three-tiered
methodological approach to research the cancer patient experience, we investigated
patient anxiety and the emotional impact that curative radiation therapy has on these
individuals. Our methodology, comprised of methods taken from quantitative, qualitative,
and design research approaches, was designed to construct a research platform that would
allow us to gather quantifiable data about our patient population while also using more
qualitative approaches to gain a deeper understanding of the individuals’ patient
experience. We used patient questionnaires as our quantitative method, user observations
and interviews as our qualitative methods, and design probe kits as our design method.
Each method was chosen because of its ability to provide us with a different perspective on
the patients’ clinical experience. By structuring these methods around the same shared
research question, we were able to find correlative relationships between the data collected
from each, despite their different methodological approaches. This paper demonstrates that
our three-tiered methodology provides a deep understanding of the user experience, from a
systems level view down to that of the patient. In conclusion, this paper argues that it is
important for design researches to select methods that build upon each other and provide
different perspectives of the user, in order to create a holistic understanding of the user
experience.

DRS 2012 Bangkok