1.
Design Research (DR):
A Critical Review
C.Voigt
Centre for Social Innovation
- MASI 2013

2.
Three Questions
• Taxonomy: What is DR?
• Practicability: When to use DR?
• Generalisability: What is a design?
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

3.
1st Question: What is DR ?
Motivation:
•
Research uses different categories for its instruments. The category
tells you what to expect and what not to expect. This is important to
know in order to evaluate DR against the appropriate standards.
Question:
•
What category does DR belong to? Is it a methodology, a method, a
framework, a theory or something else?
Answer:
•
Formalistic; define and compare
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

4.
Definitions ‘Jog-Through’
•
Methodology: specifies a general set of assumptions about what
can be observed vs what is inferred, how do we justify our
inferences and how do we justify our research (Onto-, Epistemo-,
Axio-logy)
(Sarantakos 1998, p.33)
•
Method: describes the interplay between data collection, data
reduction, data display and conclusion drawing/verification (Miles &
Huberman 1994, p.10)
•
Framework: graphical or textual description of key constructs to be
studied and their presumed relationship. They may be
commonsensical, theory- or data driven. (Miles & Huberman 1994,
p.18)
•
Theory (e.g. about design improvement) is a framework plus agreed
upon standards to evaluate its content, e.g. comprehensiveness,
parsimony and conservatism (Quine 1978, Web of beliefs)
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

5.
Maturity of DR
Methodology
Method
Ontology
Data
Collection
Data
Display
Conclusion
Verification
Neg.
C.Voigt
No
Definition
what a
design is.
*
Key
constructs
&
Relationsh
ips
**
*
*
pragmatic
user
centered
Pos.
-
Axiology
Theory
*
Iterative
Reactive
algorithms
prototypes
Artifact
centered
Replication
Design
Pos. and
negative
Design
knowledge
Partially
technolog.
Deterministic
No guidelines
about what
data to
collect? E.g.
Use-cases,
User-feedback
Etc.
No
guidelines
about how
to visualize
design
changes
over time.
At times:
One-sided
Deterministic
Lacks
construct
definitions

6.
2nd Question: When to use DR?
Motivation:
•
Every research involves a design. Does this mean you do design
research?
Question:
•
What are DR’s strengths?
Answer:
•
Good for developmental research, aimed at mainly technical
systems. There might be better alternatives for socio-technical
systems.
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

7.
Focus on emergent, multidisciplinary design issues
What can researchers tell practitioners who want to
implement effective online collaboration in a virtual
meeting room (Features: VoIP, shared applications,
opinion poll etc.) ?
Critical success factors:
a) Functionalities of an application (RE, SE)
b) The interface of an application (HCI)
c) Users knowledge of the interface (HCI)
d) Shared understanding of objectives (Cognitive sciences)
e) Practice of online collaboration (Social sciences)
f) Institutional backup (Organisational sciences)
g) ...
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

8.
Artefact centred: Between Edison and Pasteur
Design needs to develop generalisable knowledge.
Research is inspired by:
Considerations of
use?(Prescriptive)
Quest for
fundamental
understanding?
(Descriptive)
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation.
Washington Brookings Institution Press (available online).
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

9.
DR: Interventionist, Iterative and Contextual
• Improvements of technology
(any form of practical implementations)
Vijay Vaishnavi or Bill Kuechler (2006)
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

10.
Negative Design Knowledge
Epistemic Cultures: how the sciences make knowledge By K. (Karin) Knorr-Cetina
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

11.
3rd Question: What is design?
Motivation:
• Design can be understood as a process or as product.
Question:
• Does the definition of design matter?
Answer:
• Different definitions suggest different means of design.
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

12.
Design Definitions
• A design is a plan to transform a given situation into a
desired one (Simon 1996).
– a procedure
• A design is the fixation of knowledge (Perkins 1986).
– a knife (shape, sawing function etc)
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

13.
Design Implications
 Situated Design –
Context Dependency
(Winograd 1987)
 Embodied Design –
Proactive Users,
Multiple Meaning Designs
(Dourish 2004)
 Shared Design –
The usage of a design is
negotiated
(Hutchinson 1995)
None of the above design approaches thinks of design
as an isolated artifact.
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013

14.
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dourish, P. (2004). Where the action is : the foundations of embodied
interaction. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures : how the sciences make
knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Perkins, D. N. (1986). Knowledge as design. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum
Associates.
Sarantakos, S. (1998). Social Research (2nd ed.): Macmillan Education
Australia.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (Third edition ed.).
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic sience and technological
innovation. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Voigt, C. & Swatman, P. M. C. (2006). Learning through Interaction:
improving practice with design-based research. International Journal of
Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 3(3), 207-224.
Winograd, T. & Flores, C. F. (1987). Understanding computers and
cognition : a new foundation for design. Reading, Mass. Sydney: AddisonWesley.
C.Voigt
- MASI 2013