Theme 5:1

In the field of studies, data and method are the core factors that contribute in creating meaningful results. But whereas most fields have a preferred method that produces the most relevant data, design research usually has a need for using multidisciplinary methods in order to achieve the most useful results. In this blog post I will present and discuss the key features of design research, and the benefits – and disadvantages – of this field of study.

As design theory is using different types of methods, and often even combining several, the data produced often comes in various forms. The essay “Differentiated driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars” by Anders Lundström is a perfect example of how design research can end up with various forms of data. In order to find out how to improve the range-estimation of electric cars Lundström have been driving a selected number of cars, read information, read online forum posts regarding rage-estimators in electric cars, had semi-structured interviews with people with different kinds of experience and tested what he calls the “guess-o-meter” himself. These various approaches create a combination of qualitative data:

- Experience from driving the cars

- Opinions and information from interviews, forums etc.

- Technical data from testing the guess-o-meter

By analysing these forms of data Lundström can apply them onto the idea of how and speed estimator should be designed.

However, design research does not always require more than one method in order to attain reliable data. In the essay “Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space” by Ylva Fernaeus and Jakob Tholander only one qualitative method is used. By observations Fernaeus and Tholander are able to qualitatively analyse children’s behaviour while they are interacting with a computer program. This means that the only form of empirical data they attain is the children’s behaviour. Depending on how the children are reacting and interacting with the program, Fernaeus and Tholander are adjusting their design step by step in order to achieve the most useful and rewarding system (result).

With this in mind, I do perceive practical design work as a form of knowledge production. As the design gradually improves the study tests different theories, verify and falsify them depending on the data produced and create information about the most useful/valid design. The method can also generate valuable information about how to pursue this kind of study or how to approach the field/object of study. As Fernaeus and Tholander had to go through a lot of tests before they could determine an appropriate program that integrated tangibles as representation of digital information - this produced information about what is and what is not relevant.

I believe this is the most important difference between design driven research in comparison to other research methods. Instead of having a strict framework and path to follow during the research, design research has the advantage of being open to alterations during it’s methodological process. This also causes a different approach to the result: instead of expecting an certain answer or result, design research’s goal seems to mainly de finding the most reliable/relevant option.

Although design research is useful and advantageous in many ways considering how adaptable it is depending on the circumstances, I do believe it has a disadvantage. With modern technology developing in a fast pace, and the social (physical and psychological) conditions with it, it cannot be replicated after a certain time. Firstly: as the technology have changed, the results may be different as well depending on whether the technology has become somewhat dated, or e.g. in Fernaeus and Tholander’s case, because the next generation of children are a lot more accustomed to growing up in a tech-intergrated society. Secondly, as technology evolves some kinds of studies becomes irrelevant. As today’s studies are trying to understand programing in a tangible context, maybe this won’t be necessary information/knowledge in a couple of years.