Activity
-
Anna Talley posted an articleThe future of Design Studies: Update. see more
We are extremely sad to announce that on the 10th July, Peter Lloyd, the Editor-in-Chief of Design Studies, together with the entire Editorial Board and other Editors, resigned their positions on the journal. This Follows the unacceptable actions of Elsevier of 1) demanding a seven-fold increase in publications or facing closure; 2) appointing a new Editor-in-Chief without experience of publishing in the journal and without notification; and 3) changing the scope of the journal without consultation either with the editorial team or the Design Research Society.
There has been mass protestation and requests for Elsevier to reverse what are widely viewed as disastrous actions for a successful and leading journal. On 29th June, Elsevier stated that they would not reverse these decisions.
Following the publication of an article in the UK Times Higher Education Supplement on July 5th, Elsevier contacted individual members of the Editorial Board to offer them a 'personal discussion'. Such an approach was viewed with great suspicion by the Editorial Board who continued to provide unwavering support for Professor Lloyd's leadership. One member of the Editorial Board commented: "I would not normally expect over 30 academics to totally agree about anything and [Elsevier] might like to reflect on that."
In his resignation letter, Professor Lloyd noted that his contract with Elsevier required him to: “observe the best interests of the journal” and that he had endeavoured to honour this in protesting Elsevier's actions. He states that: "Elsevier have disrespected the Editorial Team and undermined the legitimacy of the Editorial Board - the cornerstone for ensuring quality for any academic journal. The lack of consultation with the core journal readership in unilaterally redefining the journal scope is appalling."
Professor Lloyd said he has been overwhelmed by the expressions of support he has received: these have not only come from members of the DRS, but other design societies, design journal editors, and authors who have withdrawn their papers from consideration for Design Studies. "the solidarity in condemning the actions of Elsevier has been staggering", he says, "other journals have even offered to publish special issues of papers planned for Design Studies."
There is clear energy and expertise to establish a new journal for the Society, says Professor Lloyd: "although what has happened is awful, we should seize this opportunity to establish a new journal for the field of design research, something that keeps the spirit and quality of Design Studies, while embracing contemporary issues of design in the changing world around us." Talks are already underway with alternative publishers and platforms.
In view of Elsevier's complete lack of co-operation with the DRS in making crucial, and in our view mistaken, decisions about the future of Design Studies, the DRS intends to sever all links with the journal. DRS Members are encouraged to forward these announcements to their own institutions and university libraries to make them aware of what Elsevier has done.
The DRS Executive Board
Previous announcement regarding Elsevier and Design Studies (6th July)
-
Anna Talley posted an articleQ&A with the authors of Design Studies' Best Paper 2021. see more
The Design Studies Journal has announced the winning article for Best Paper 2021, ‘Situated emotion and its constructive role in collaborative design: A mixed-method study of experienced designers’ by Xiao Ge, Larry Leifer and Linlin Shui. We got in touch with the authors to ask them a few questions about their paper and the future of design research.
Can you tell us a bit more about the context of the article? Why do you think it’s timely to design practice now?
XIAO: Emotion is often viewed as unformalized factors that are separate from the intellectual process of technological work. Engineering education emphasizes “think”, not “feel”. Engineers do not talk about emotions. This bias is also perpetuated in design research. For decades, research on design (especially engineering design) and its process has focused on deriving the rational and analytical basis. We see very limited work on emotion. This article is our attempt to challenge the stereotypical views about emotion in design practice and research, especially in engineering disciplines. We started to address the dearth of attention to emotions and feelings by studying good, experienced designers and providing empirical evidence for how emotion constitutes critical moments of creativity, learning and collaboration.
We started investigating designer emotion at Stanford Center for Design Research more than ten years ago (e.g., Larry Leifer’s PhD advisee Malte Jung at the time also researched designer emotion). To date, emotion research in design science is still a marginal field. Studies in the field often do not show adequate knowledge about the emotion theories that they have either explicitly or implicitly adopted. This article comes at a time when we still desperately need more rigorous research to provide empirical evidence to show that emotion matters, that emotion is intertwined with cognition, creativity, learning and performance in design. On the other hand, now is a perhaps a good time to trigger scholarly interest in emotion, as recent years have seen a burst of work developing computational tools and machine learning methods that are conducive to emotion research.
LARRY: engineering education emphases science and denigrates emotions. Xiao and I are deeply engaged with project based education at global scale (ME310ABC, 3 quarters). I believe that Xiao was sensitized to emotion factors across nationalities ( Growing up in different cultures begets different emotions, especially during teamwork).
What is ‘emotion research’? How do emotions relate to design practice and design research?
XIAO: Emotion is a familiar everyday label that is otherwise elusive to research as a neural, psychological, social and cultural phenomenon. We think an important job research does for the society is that it makes “familiar” problems “unfamiliar” (ref: Serge Moscovici). In the context of emotion research, for instance, we are all familiar with folk emotion concepts of anger, excitement and so on and know that if we feel certain emotions, we express them (especially in the Western contexts). Preschool classrooms teach children these ideas using the emotion charts. Pixar movie Inside Out is one of the many cultural products that reinforce the idea that emotions are distinct things inside us seeking expression in the face and body. We commonly believe so. Even the airport security staff are trained to detect deception and assess risk based on people’s facial and bodily behaviors (see more in Lisa Feldman Barrett’s book How Emotions Are Made). However, recent 20 years of progress in emotion research shows little support to such an essentialist view that people “express” their emotions in universal consistent ways. Instead, research suggests that humans “construct” emotions based on their bodily and situational signals. Emotion research in design is endeavors to make what is familiar in design research and design research unfamiliar. For instance, the current article challenges the familiar idea that emotions are noisy byproducts of designers’ design process. We need more research to allow us to unlearn old ideas about emotion in design, form new perspectives, and develop deeper understandings about design practice.
Why did you choose a mixed-method study? What did this add to your analysis?
XIAO: The mixed-method approach was chosen based on our theoretical perspective. To study emotion that is relevant and revealing of designers' experiences and processes in their respective ecologically valid settings, we have adopted the “constructed” / "situated" theoretical view of emotion. From this view, emotions are not just in the head, on the body, but also out there; emotions are sociocultural constructions. This theoretical perspective inspired us to seek a multimodal, mixed-methods approach so that we could interrogate the various vectors of emotion—physiological, behavioral and social—in naturalistic settings.
LARRY: Engineering has NO proven methodology for studying human behavior (the usual focus is on materials and math). Hence, Xiao needed to search for methodology, give no precedence.
What does "design research" mean to you?
XIAO: As part of the design research group led by Prof. Larry Leifer at Stanford University, we broadly investigate “what is it that designers do when designers do design”. Our work has contributed to the theorizing of various phenomena around design—team performance, workspace design, design process, interaction design, and design learning, to give a few examples, as well as the development of rigorous empirical approaches.
LARRY: Our core research question has always been, “WHY are they doing that?”
How has the DRS or Design Studies supported your work in design research?
XIAO: Amongst others, Kees Dorst’s research on framing, and Robin Adams’ work on emotion and learning, inspired the formation of this research project back in 2016-17. In 2019, Xiao Ge (the first author) had a long conversation with Andy Dong on uncertainty management, emotional disturbance and learning, which greatly helped Xiao synthesize research ideas but also motivated her to persist. What also made a huge difference are the insightful comments from Editor-in-Chief Peter Lloyd and the reviewers, who have helped us get this article into a much better shape. A lot of support came from Stanford design research people—Neeraj Sonalkar, Ade Mabogunje, Malte Jung, Nik Martelaro, David Sirkin, Becky Currano, Wendy Ju, George Toye, Sheri Sheppard and others—many of whom are part of or are extended members of DRS. We deeply appreciate all the support from DRS and Design Studies communities.
LARRY: “Why” always takes us to methodology across teams and cultures. The names Xiao has given you come from people from India, Nigeria, Germany, USA, China (pre and post- communism), men and women.
-
Anna Talley posted an articleThe Editor-in-Chief and the Chair of the DRS select the Design Studies Best Paper Award for 2021. see more
Design Studies Best Paper Award 2021
We are pleased to announce the winner of the Design Studies Award for the best paper published in 2021: 'Situated emotion and its constructive role in collaborative design: A mixed-method study of experienced designers’ by Xiao Ge, Larry Leifer, and Linlin Shui.
The Design Studies best paper award is made annually, jointly by Elsevier Science and the Design Research Society (DRS). The criteria for the Award, in order of priority, are: contribution to the development of the field of design research, originality of research or scholarship, breadth of relevance, and clarity and style of presentation.
Nominations for the Award are made by the journal Editors and the winner selected by the Editor-in-Chief and the Chair of the DRS.
In recognition of their outstanding contribution to advancing knowledge in the field of design studies the nominated papers have been made available as an open-access Article Collection until March 31, 2023.
Nominations for the Design Studies Best Paper Award 2021 were:
Xiao Ge, Larry Leifer, Linlin Shui
Situated emotion and its constructive role in collaborative design: A mixed-method study of experienced designers
Volume 75, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101020
Björn Fischer, Britt Östlund, Alexander Peine
Design multiple: How different configurations of participation matter in design practice
Volume 74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101016
Ton Otto, Jennifer Deger, George E. Marcus
Ethnography and exhibition design: Insights from the Moesgaard inaugural
Volume 74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100989
Milene Gonçalves, Philip Cash
The life cycle of creative ideas: Towards a dual-process theory of ideation
Volume 72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100988
M. Carolina Escobar-Tello, Krisna Ruette-Orihuela, Katherine V. Gough, Javier A. Fayad-Sierra, Irene Velez-Torres
Decolonising design in peacebuilding contexts
Volume 73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101001
Julie Milovanovic, Mo Hu, Tripp Shealy, John Gero
Characterization of concept generation for engineering design through temporal brain network analysis
Volume 76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101044
-
Anna Talley posted an articleA conversation with Philip Cash, Jaap Daalhuizen and Laura Hay, editors of Design Studies Vol. 78. see more
The latest volume of Design Studies contains a Special Section on Design Research Notes, ‘motivated by the growing need for design research to more actively reflect on, celebrate, and build research quality to mature as a field.’ We spoke with the editors, Philip Cash, Jaap Daalhuizen and Laura Hay, to get their insights about the issue, its contents and what they hope readers will take away. Their answers are edited here as a composite.
What are your backgrounds and professional affiliations?
Philip Cash: In 2012 I received my PhD in engineering design from the University of Bath, UK, and am now an Associate Professor in Engineering Design at DTU Management, Technical University of Denmark. From my starting point in engineering design, I have developed a research focus on design activity and behavioural design, and – most relevant to the Research Notes – issues of research quality in design research.
Jaap Daalhuizen: In 2014 I received my PhD in Industrial Design Engineering from the Delft University of Technology. I am now an associate professor in design methodology at DTU Management, Technical University of Denmark. My research focuses on design processes and methods – a rather unique and core area of research in design. With design methodology being the bridge between research and practice, I also focus on issues of research quality related to design methodology.
Laura Hay: In 2015, I received my PhD in engineering systems design from the University of Strathclyde, UK, where I am now a Lecturer in Product Design in the Department of Design, Manufacturing and Engineering Management. My research focuses on cognition and neural activity in the product and engineering design process. From a research quality perspective, this includes how we can apply and adapt methods from psychology and neuroscience in a robust way to advance our understanding of design and designers.
Can you provide a short summary of the special section and its contents?
Design research is almost uniquely positioned to provide rich research insights from multiple perspectives, with the potential for wide-ranging scientific and societal impact. With this potential comes the responsibility to publish high quality research. In response, the Research Notes aim to enhance and celebrate design research quality.
To do this we aim to provide a dedicated platform for research quality discussion, that is both accessible and reflexive; develop concrete, actionable guidance that can be used to improve design research practice; and help in accelerating and democratizing the evolution of design research practices across the community. In doing this, it is our intention to offer a transparent and inclusive platform for discussions around research quality, which promotes dialogue and diverse perspectives going forward.
The Research Notes themselves take a starting point in nine major themes (see Fig.1 from the editorial): knowledge construction and asking the right questions; interdisciplinary interactions; research method selection, use, and development; standards, reporting and replicability; research impact on practice and education; design research identity and future agenda; research ethics; mapping and understanding development in design research; and studies of design methods. However, these are by no means exhaustive, and we encourage new themes and discussions.
Figure 1: Overview and summary of the nine emerging design research quality themes (Cash, Daalhuizen, et al., 2022)
We also had some great contributions setting the tone and standard for the Research Notes going forward. Notably, not all themes attracted a publication so there is a huge call to action implicit in this initial collection!
Goldschmidt and Matthews (2022) highlight the importance of well framed research questions and propose the RIN.AFE framework for question formulation, providing a key foundation for evaluating research questions and their characteristics in design research.
McComb and Jablokow (2022) discuss the challenges faced by the design research community in balancing a multidisciplinary tradition against consolidation around core disciplinary foundations and in response propose the Degrees of Disciplinarity Framework.
Cash et al. (2022) highlight the challenges associated with sampling in design research, and bring together guidance from related fields to outline a sample development process and eight key sampling considerations.
Hay et al. (2022) discuss functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as an emerging method for design neurocognition research, and propose a study development process that addresses specific issues associated with neuroimaging in a design context.
Rangarajan et al. (2022) explore the challenges associated with design studies on the subjective, cultural, and contextual dimensions of affective quality, and propose descriptive phenomenology as a qualitative approach to this area.
Surma-aho and Holtta-Otto (2022) examine the nature of empathy in design research, identifying core concepts and operationalizations that can drive future empathy research in design.
Abraham (2022) discusses ideation in artistic creativity and identifies three core context factors that translate to the study of design creativity and thus provides guidance to improve design research quality in this area. This Research Note also exemplifies how scholars from adjacent fields can provide valuable insights from their own disciplinary perspective.
Prochner and Godin (2022) examine possible standards for quality in Research Through Design (RtD) and provide guidance to improve planning, reporting, assessment, and discussions of quality.
Zielhuis et al. (2022) explore perspectives on how design research impacts design practice, as well as different ways of achieving this. They point to key barriers that can stand in the way of realising impact and provide guidance for researchers and funding bodies.
van Oorschot et al. (2022) describe seven key dimensions for classifying participation in design research, spanning researcher, project, knowledge construction, reporting, and methodology.
Gray (2022) examines how we can formalise understanding of what methods are and how they function by describing method creation and the knowledge that informs this. He also identifies how elements of methods connect to their use and performance by designers.
Together these form a really diverse set of papers, which also point to numerous areas of opportunity for future submissions.
Are there any insights into design research that surprised you when you were editing the issue?
The thing that most surprised us was the overwhelming degree of interest and positive support for this project from across the community, including researchers from the Design Research Society and the Design Society; at different careers stages including PhD, mid-, and more senior; and reflecting almost every methodological and philosophical background in the field. The initial call for abstracts attracted more than 140 researchers!
It seems that the desire to mature the design research tradition is there, and hopefully the Research Notes will provide one stepping stone towards this.
What do you hope readers will learn from the special section?
In the longer-term we hope that the Research Notes will help design researchers:
- To provide a common forum for research quality discussions, which enhances their perceived importance and accessibility to the field.
- To develop an evolving reference source for best practices in research methodology, theory development, and scholarship, connecting quality insights and actionable guidance within the field of design.
- To create a platform for reflecting on the quality of design research, in relation to research quality discussions within the field as well as in related fields.
The current set of papers provide a fantastic start to this endeavour and already include several useful guides, frameworks, and discussions that researchers can use to concretely improve their own work.
Find links to all of the above articles and read the issue in full here.
Citations:
Abraham, A. (2022). Creativity or Creativities? Why Context Matters. Design Studies, 78, 101060.
Cash, P., Daalhuizen, J., & Hay, L. (2022). Editorial: Design Research Notes. Design Studies, 78, 101079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101079
Cash, P., Isaksson, O., Maier, A., & Summers, J. D. (2022). Sampling in Design Research: Eight Key Considerations. Design Studies, 78, 101077.
Goldschmidt, G., & Matthews, B. (2022). Formulating design research questions: A framework. Design Studies, 78, 101062.
Gray, C. (2022). Languaging Design Methods. Design Studies, 78, 101076.
Hay, L., Duffy, A., Gilbert, S., & Grealy, M. (2022). Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in design studies: methodological considerations, challenges, and recommendations. Design Studies, 78, 101078.
McComb, C., & Jablokow, K. (2022). A Conceptual Framework for Multidisciplinary Design Research with Example Application to Agent-Based Modeling. Design Studies, 78, 101074.
Prochner, I., & Godin, D. (2022). Quality in Research Through Design Projects: Recommendations for Evaluation and Enhancement. Design Studies, 78, 101061.
Rangarajan, V., Onkar, P., De Kruiff, A., & Barron, D. (2022). A Descriptive Phenomenological Approach to Perception of Affective Quality in Design Inspiration. Design Studies, 78, 101072.
Surma-aho, A., & Holtta-Otto, K. (2022). Conceptualization and Operationalization of Empathy in Design Research. Design Studies, 78, 101075.
Van Oorschot, R., Snelders, D., Kleinsmann, M., & Buur, J. (2022). Participation in Design Research. Design Studies, 78, 101073.
Zielhuis, M., Sleeswijk Visser, F. S., Andriessen, D., & Stappers, P. J. (2022). Making design research relevant for design practice: what’s in the way? Design Studies, 78, 101063.
-
Anna Talley posted an article'Crafters, explorers, innovators, and co-creators: Narratives in designers’ identity work' awarded. see more
The DRS recently awarded the 2020 Best Paper in Design Research to 'Crafters, explorers, innovators, and co-creators: Narratives in designers’ identity work'. We reached out to Professor Tua Björklund, one of the article's co-authors, to learn more about her work and the authors' process behind the winning article.
Can you tell us a bit more about the context of the article?
We started out looking at design practices across different stakeholders in an international design agency. However, identity was something that emerged in the interviews with interesting dynamics - designers were shifting their narratives of design work hand in hand with different facets of their own identities and their organization. At the same time, despite representing a wide variety of specializations, nationalities and experience levels, the same stories around crafting, learning, innovating and co-creation kept popping up. Having a stable "home base" community connection was an importance balance for the inherent uncertainty connected to novelty in creative work.
What does "design research" mean to you?
Herbert Simon's take on design as "changing existing situations into preferred ones" really resonates with me - design comes in so many shapes and sorts, yet despite subfield specifics, there's an underlying focus in research of trying to understand this creation process.
How has the DRS supported your work in design research?
DRS conferences and publications provide a great forum for design researchers across different disciplines to share their thoughts and discuss. I find this interaction really valuable.
What are your hopes for the future of design research?
I hope the active dialog between theory and practice will continue, and that design research can further consolidate connections across disciplines to form a solid, evidence-based understanding of effective design practices. Many design-relevant phenomena like framing connect to several fields, and design has a lot to offer in developing theoretical frameworks with wide applicability.
Do you have any favourite design research resources?
Design Studies is a great way to stay not only on top of current research, but I also like to incorporate many of the study results and cases into my teaching.
Where can people find out more about you and your work?
www.designfactory.aalto,fi, or @TuaBjorklund on Twitter.
You can find the full paper at this link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X2030020X
-
Anna Talley posted an articleEditorial insights on the latest Special Section on sticky notes in Design Studies Vol. 76. see more
Bo T. Christensen, Copenhagen Business School Kim Halskov, Aarhus University
The latest issue of Design Studies, Volume 76, contains a Special Section on sticky notes in design, guest edited by Bo T. Christensen and Kim Halskov. We sat down with Bo and Kim to ask them a bit more about the section and their editorial process.
Why is an investigation of sticky notes especially relevant to design research?
This special section is devoted to the roles played by the ubiquitous sticky note in design activities. The topic was motivated by the observation that sticky notes have become omnipresent in many types of collaborative design across the past few decades. It now seems almost inescapable that when engaging in collaborative design projects (particularly with users and non-experts) that you will also have a block of sticky notes in hand. Yet, in looking towards the literature on design support tools and design materials, little theorizing has evolved as to why that is, and what important roles sticky notes play in design processes.
This kind of sticky note practice is now extremely common, with a host of creativity techniques now utilizing sticky-notes-on-boards, now also extending into digitized versions.
What interested you in the topic of sticky notes?
Our interest stem from the realization that we actually do not know very much about the use of sticky note in design practice. We only know a little about why sticky notes are used, we have a limited understanding of exactly how socio-material interaction with the small yellow notes plays out in practice, and what this type of interaction implies for design cognition and collaboration. With this special section, we aimed to help rectify this gap in the literature.
Can you provide a short summary of the issue and its contents?
This special section is about the the roles played by the ubiquitous sticky note in design activities and includes four research articles:
Ball, Christensen & Halskov explore how the sticky notes support design thinking and collaboration. They show that sticky notes have inherent properties (paper, size, shape, color and stickiness) that afford a set of unique activities, associated with their ability to be related, re-configured, categorized, and decomposed.
Ben Matthews, Khan, Snow, Schlosser, Salisbury & Sarah Matthews highlight the socio-material dimensions of sticky notes, and the value of adopting a socio-material analysis to the study of design materials.
Rakova and Fedorenko investigate how sticky notes challenge the historical hierarchies of South Korean corporate culture. Using actor-network theory, the authors unveil the fact that sticky notes not only support human action but also co-direct it. The analysis also demonstrates that sticky notes democratize design processes by enabling collaborators to work in equal positions, and that sticky notes support low-ranking collaborative participants by muting high-ranking ones.
Christensen and Abildgaard explore how design teams move sticky notes around on boards. The study is motivated by the unique affordances of sticky notes, tangible and sticky, and reveals that through their moving, sticky notes become related to other sticky notes, form associations, categories, and build relational structures.
How did you decide which papers to include in the special issue? How do they connect to or differ from each other?
We wanted to demonstrate the breadth of contemporary sticky notes research with respect to scope (e.g. cognition, collaboration, creativity, design methods) and theoretical foundation (design material, actor-network theory), and also with respect to research method (ethnography, video analysis, literature survey).
Are there any insights about sticky notes that surprised you when you were editing the issue?
Partially as a result of COVID-19, much of sticky note design collaboration has taken place digitally – using online tools - the past years. It surprised us that the digital collaborative experience of using sticky notes is quite distinct from using the physical counterpart in some important ways.
What do you hope readers will learn from the special issue?
Over aim with the special section is to offer new insights about the nature of sticky notes, and, inspire other researchers to build on and further advance our understanding of the nature of sticky note cognition and collaboration. -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleNominations for Design Studies 2020 Best Paper Award see more
Nominations for Design Studies 2020 Best Paper Award
We are pleased to announce the nominations for the Design Studies Award for the best paper published in 2020. The award is made annually, jointly by Elsevier Science and the Design Research Society in recognition of the contribution to advancing knowledge in the field of design research.
Nominations for the Award are made by the journal Editors and the winner selected by the Editor-in-Chief and the Chair of the DRS. This collection of outstanding research papers has been made available freely as an open access Article Collection until March 31, 2022. Please visit: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/special-issue/10TPF34RP8Z
The criteria for the Award are:
• contribution to the development of the field of design research;
• originality of research or scholarship;
• breadth of relevance;
• clarity and style of presentation.Nominated Papers
Between specificity and openness: How architects deal with design-use complexities
Liesbeth Stam, Peter-Paul Verbeek, Ann Heylighen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.11.010Make and break details: The architecture of design-build education
Claire Nicholas, Arlene Oak
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.12.003Crafters, explorers, innovators, and co-creators: Narratives in designers’ identity work
Tua A. Björklund, Teo Keipi, Hanna Maula
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.003Where next for design research? Understanding research impact and theory building
Philip Cash
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.03.001Developing critical documentation practices for design researchers
Zoë Sadokierski
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.03.002Increasing team ideation by sequencing the task type and content
Nicoleta Meslec, Daniel Graff, Mark A. Clark
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100947 -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies Latest Contents, Volume 74, May 2021 see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 74, May 2021
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/74/
Design Studies is the journal of the Design Research Society
Problem framing and cognitive style: Impacts on design ideation perceptions
Eli M. Silk, Amy E. Rechkemmer, Shanna R. Daly, Kathryn W. Jablokow, Seda McKilligan
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101015Design multiple: How different configurations of participation matter in design practice
Björn Fischer, Britt Östlund, Alexander Peine
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101016Towards an integrative approach to researching design expertise
Stella Tan
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101017Co-producing, curating and reconfiguring dwelling patterns: A design anthropological approach for sustainable dwelling futures in residential suburbs
Teresa Palmieri, Liesbeth Huybrechts, Oswald Devisch
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101011Ethnography and exhibition design: Insights from the Moesgaard inaugural
Ton Otto, Jennifer Deger, George E. Marcus
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100989Note: The last two papers form part of a Special Issue on Design Anthropology
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/special-issue/10K7JX45KSR -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleLatest contents for Design Studies, March see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 73, March 2021
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/73
Design Studies is the journal of the Design Research Society
Historicising design space: Uses of the past in participatory prefiguring of spatial development
Mela Zuljevic, Liesbeth Huybrechts
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.100993Decolonising design in peacebuilding contexts
M. Carolina Escobar-Tello, Krisna Ruette-Orihuela, Katherine V. Gough, Javier A. Fayad-Sierra, Irene Velez-Torres
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101001Understanding representation: Contrasting gesture and sketching in design through dual-process theory
Philip Cash, Anja Maier
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.100992Design games as fieldwork: Re-visiting design games from a design anthropological perspective
Mette Gislev Kjaersgaard, Eva Knutz, Thomas Markussen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.100994Interweaving vulnerability and everyday design: Encounters around an aquarium in a paediatric oncology ward
Piet Tutenel, Ann Heylighen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101004Note: The last two papers form part of a Special issue on Design Anthropology:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/special-issue/10K7JX45KSR -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies Volume 71 Contents see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 71, November 2020
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/71/
Design Studies is the journal of the Design Research Society
Design and responsible research innovation in the additive manufacturing industry
Katharina Ruckstuhl, Rafaela Costa Camoes Rabello, Sally Davenport
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100966The impact of confirmation bias on reasoning and visual attention during analysis in engineering design: An eye tracking study
Thomas Nelius, Markus Doellken, Christoph Zimmerer, Sven Matthiesen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100963The relevance of virtual reality to communication design
Simon Laing, Mark Apperley
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100965Cognitive strategies in solution mapping: How engineering designers identify problems for technological solutions
Jin Woo Lee, Shanna R. Daly, Aileen Huang-Saad, Gabriella Rodriguez, Colleen M. Seifert
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100967Prototyping strategies for stakeholder engagement during front-end design: Design practitioners’ approaches in the medical device industry
Ilka B. Rodriguez-Calero, Marianna J. Coulentianos, Shanna R. Daly, Jocelyn Burridge, Kathleen H. Sienko
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100977 -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies Volume 72 Latest Contents see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 72, January 2021
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/72/
Design Studies is the journal of the Design Research Society
Acknowledgement of 2020 Referees
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.100991Parametric modeling tools in small architectural offices: Towards an adapted design process model
Adeline Stals, Sylvie Jancart, Catherine Elsen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100978Analysing frequent natural language expressions from design conversations
Lucian-Constantin Ungureanu, Timo Hartmann
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100987Articulating care and responsibility in design: A study on the reasoning processes guiding health innovators' ‘care-making’ practices
Lysanne Rivard, Pascale Lehoux, Nicola Hagemeister
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100986The life cycle of creative ideas: Towards a dual-process theory of ideation
Milene Gonçalves, Philip Cash
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100988A cautionary tale about the impact of AI on human design teams
Guanglu Zhang, Ayush Raina, Jonathan Cagan, Christopher McComb
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.100990 -
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies Latest Contents see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 69, July 2020
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/69/
Developing critical documentation practices for design researchers
Zoë Sadokierski
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.03.002What can we share? A design game for developing the shared spaces in housing
Antti Pirinen, Anne Tervo
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.04.001Work with the beat: How dynamic patterns in team processes affect shared understanding
Philip Cash, Elies Dekoninck, Saeema Ahmed-Kristensen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.04.003Making grammars for material and tectonic complexity: An example of a thin-tile vault
Ayodh Vasant Kamath
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.05.001Contexts of briefing for service design procurements in the Finnish public sector
Seungho Park-Lee
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.05.003Investigating users’ reactions to surprising products
Niccolò Becattini, Yuri Borgianni, Gaetano Cascini, Federico Rotini
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.05.003Special Section on Design Anthropology
Design anthropology for emerging technologies: Trust and sharing in autonomous driving futures
Sarah Pink, Katalin Osz, Kaspar Raats, Thomas Lindgren, Vaike Fors
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.04.002 -
Isabel Prochner posted an articleProposals for the first set of Research Notes are due 1st September 2020 see more
Introducing Research Notes—A New Collection in Design Studies
Design Studies, the journal of the DRS, is introducing a new collection. Research Notes will be short papers on quality related issues in studies of designing, including research methods, literature review, theory development, design methodology, ethics, and research scholarship more generally. An initial Virtual Special Issue (VSI) will bring together the first set of Research Notes. Proposals for the VSI are due by 1st September.
Peter Lloyd, editor-in-chief of Design Studies, explained the value of this new collection: “The field of design research, and particularly the work that we typically publish in Design Studies, has now reached a level of maturity, distinctiveness, and sophistication that means that wider issues to do with *how* researchers conduct their research can serve as a useful foundation for further progress. My hope is that the papers we will publish as Research Notes will create a critical but reflective and constructive discourse in helping to increase the quality of future studies and the legitimacy and impact of the design research discipline.”
The Research Notes collection will be guest edited by Philip Cash, Laura Hay, Jordan Beck and Jaap Daalhuizen. Cash added that the collection aims to support design research by “1) providing authors and reviewers with a common source of state-of-the-art discussions surrounding best design research practice; 2) providing design researchers with a means of talking about and developing mitigations for methodological and research issues; [and] 3) providing a platform for opening new dialogs about how we do design research and how we can make this even better and more impactful.”
More details about the call for proposals are available at https://www.journals.elsevier.com/design-studies/call-for-papers/research-notes
-
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies latest contents: Volume 68, May 2020 see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 68, May 2020
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/68/
Design performance and designer preference in an interactive, data-driven conceptual building design scenario
Nathan C. Brown
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.01.001Read the full patent or just the claims? Mitigating design fixation and design distraction when reviewing patent documents
Edwin C.Y. Koh,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.001Staging negotiation spaces: A co-design framework
Signe Pedersen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.002Crafters, explorers, innovators, and co-creators: Narratives in designers’ identity work
Tua A. Björklund, Teo Keipi, Hanna Maula
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.003Where next for design research? Understanding research impact and theory building
Philip Cash
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.03.001Design Studies is the journal of the Design Research Society
-
Peter Lloyd posted an articleDesign Studies Special Issue: The Discipline of Design see more
Design Studies Latest Contents
Volume 65, November 2019
Special Issue: Design as a Discipline, edited by Nigel Cross
Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/design-studies/vol/65/suppl/C
To mark the 40th Anniversary of the publication of Design Studies, the journal of the DRS, Nigel Cross has edited a special issue that returns to a topic that he introduced In the very first year of publication in 1979: the Discipline of Design. A number of leading contributors were invited to reflect on the past, present, and future of the discipline and this special issue is the result.
Editorial: Design as a discipline
Nigel Cross,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.11.002Design research – Its 50-year transformation
Rachel Cooper
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.002Building a discipline: Indicators of expansion, integration and consolidation in design research across four decades
Bo T. Christensen, Linden J. Ball
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.001Advancing an understanding of design cognition and design metacognition: Progress and prospects
Linden J. Ball, Bo T. Christensen
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.003Co-evolution and emergence in design
Kees Dorst
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.005Methodological diversity and theoretical integration: Research in design fixation as an example of fixation in research design?
Nathan Crilly
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.006To empathise or not to empathise? Empathy and its limits in design
Ann Heylighen, Andy Dong
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.007Design timelines: Concrete and sticky representations of design process expertise
Cynthia J. Atman
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.004Design research, architectural research, architectural design research: An argument on disciplinarity and identity
Rachael Luck
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.11.001You make it and you try it out: Seeds of design discipline futures
Peter Lloyd
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.008
