Netta Iivari
ABSTRACT
Design is at the heart of Human Computer Interaction research and practice. In the research community, there has emerged an increasing interest in understanding and conceptualizing our research practice, particularly such entailing design. However, reflective discussion around the associated challenges and practicalities is yet limited. Moreover, so far there is limited discussion on the cross-disciplinary nature of our research and design practices: although cross-disciplinarity has been brought up as an ideal and a necessity, its practicalities and complexities remain yet poorly explored. This study examines a cross-disciplinary research project with a number of researcher-designers representing different disciplines acting as 'designers', while having a divergent understanding of it and of who has authority to do it. The study relies on nexus analysis as a sensitizing device and shows how various discourses, epistemologies and histories shape cross-disciplinary research and design. Critical reflection around our research practice entailing design is called for.
Supplemental Material
- W. Gaver. 2012. What should we expect from research through design? In Proc. SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 937--946. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Zimmerman, J. Forlizzi and S. Evenson. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proc. SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 493--502. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Zimmerman, E. Stolterman and J. Forlizzi. 2010. An analysis and critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach. In Proc. 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 310--319. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Beck and E. Stolterman. 2016. Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(2), 125--140.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Beck and E. Stolterman. 2016. Examining the types of knowledge claims made in design research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(3), 199--214.Google ScholarCross Ref
- I. Koskinen, J. Zimmerman, T. Binder, J. Redstrom and S. Wensveen. 2011. Design research through practice: From the lab, field, and showroom. Elsevier. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Bardzell, S. Bardzell and L. Koefoed Hansen. 2015. Immodest proposals: Research through design and knowledge. In Proc. 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2093--2102. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Frayling. 1993. Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers 1, 1,1--5.Google Scholar
- P. Stappers and E. Giaccardi. 2017. Research through Design. In The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Idea Group Reference, 194.Google Scholar
- P. D. Adamczyk and M. B. Twidale. 2007. Supporting multidisciplinary collaboration: requirements from novel HCI education. In Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1073--1076. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Blevis and E. Stolterman. 2009. FEATURE Transcending disciplinary boundaries in interaction design. interactions, 16(5), 48--51. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Blevis, I. K. Koskinen, K. Lee, S. Bødker, L. Chen, Y. Lim, H. Wei and R. Wakkary. 2015. Transdisciplinary Interaction Design in Design Education. In Proc. 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 833--838. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Jennings, E. Giaccardi and M. Wesolkowska. 2006. About face interface: creative engagement in the new media arts and HCI. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 16631666. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Khaled and G. Ingram. 2012. Tales from the front lines of a largescale serious game project. In Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 69--78. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Moore and D: Lottridge. 2010. Interaction design in the university: designing disciplinary interactions. In CHI '10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2735--2744. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Morrison, R. Corish and A. J. Sellen. 2014. Place-onas: shared resource for designing body tracking applications. In CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1861--1866 ACM,. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Rogers, M. Scaife and A. Rizzo. 2005. Interdisciplinarity: An emergent or engineered process. Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science, 265--285.Google Scholar
- K. van Turnhout, A. Bennis, S. Craenmehr, R. Holwerda, M. Jacobs, R. Niels, L. Zaad, S. Hoppenbrouwers, D. Lenior and R. Bakker. 2014. Design patterns for mixed-method research in HCI. In Proc. 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 361--370. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Held. 2016. Transdisciplinary Research through Design -- Shifting Paradigms as an Opportunity. In Design as Research: Positions, Arguments, Perspectives. Birkhäuser. 186--192.Google Scholar
- R. Scollon. 2001. Action and text: towards an integrated understanding of the place of text in social (inter) action, mediated discourse analysis and the problem of social action. In Methods of critical discourse analysis, 113.Google Scholar
- R. Scollon and S. Scollon. 2004. Nexus analysis: Discourse and the emerging internet. Routledge.Google Scholar
- S. Scollon and I. de Saint-Georges. 2012. Mediated discourse analysis. In The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Routledge. 66--78.Google Scholar
- N. Cross. 2001. Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design issues, 17(3), 49--55.Google Scholar
- A. Hevner. 2007. A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian journal of information systems, 19(2), 4.Google Scholar
- S. March and G. Smith. 1995. Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision support systems, 15(4), 251--266. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Gaver. 2016. Indiscipline. In Design as Research: Positions, Arguments, Perspectives. Birkhäuser. 193--196.Google Scholar
- J. Löwgren. 1995. Applying design methodology to software development. In Proc. 1st conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, & techniques, 87--95. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Krippendorff. 2016. Design, an Undisciplinable Profession. In Design as Research: Positions, Arguments, Perspectives. Birkhäuser. 197--206.Google Scholar
- J. Simonsen and T. Robertson (Eds.). 2012. Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge.Google Scholar
- N. Iivari and K. Kuutti. 2017. Critical Design Research and Information Technology: Searching for Empowering Design. In Proc. 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 983--993. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C: DiSalvo. 2012. Adversarial design. The MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Bardzell, J. Bardzell, J. Forlizzi, J. Zimmerman and J. Antanitis. 2012. Critical design and critical theory: the challenge of designing for provocation. In Proc. Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 288297. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Choi and A. Pak. 2006. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and investigative medicine. Medecine clinique et experimentale, 29(6), 351364.Google Scholar
- J. Greenbaum and M. Kyng (Eds.). 1991. Design at Work. Cooperative Design of Computer Systems, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Kensing and J. Blomberg. 1998. Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 7(3--4), 167--185. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Cooper and J. Bowers. 1995. Representing the users: Notes on the disciplinary rhetoric of human-computer interaction. In The Social and Interactional Dimensions of Human-Computer Interfaces. Cambridge University Press. 48--66. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Gulliksen, I. Boivie and B. Göransson. 2006. Usability professionals- current practices and future development. Interacting with computers, 18(4), 568--600. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Iivari. 2006. Understanding the work of an HCI practitioner. In Proc. 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction. 185--194. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Iivari, H. Karasti, T. Molin-Juustila, S. Salmela, A. Syrjänen and E. Halkola. 2009. Mediation between design and use -- revisiting five empirical studies. Human IT -- Journal for Information Technology Studies as a Human Science 10(2), 81--126.Google Scholar
- K. Lawrence. 2006. Walking the Tightrope: The Balancing Acts of a Large e-Research Project. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 15(4), 385--411. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Lee. 2007. Boundary Negotiating Artifacts: Unbinding the Routine of Boundary Objects and Embracing Chaos in Collaborative Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 16(3), 307--339. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Levina and E. Vaast. 2005. The Emergence of Boundary Spanning Competence in Practice: Implications for Implementation and Use of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly 29(2), 335--363. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Björgvinsson, P. Ehn and P. Hillgren. 2012. Agonistic participatory design: working with marginalised social movements. CoDesign, 8(2--3), 127--144.Google Scholar
- E. Grönvall, L. Malmborg and J. Messeter. 2016. Negotiation of values as driver in community-based PD. In Proc. 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full papers-Volume 1, 41--50. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Hooper, D. Millard, J. Fantauzzacoffin and J. Kaye. 2013. Science vs. science: the complexities of interdisciplinary research. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 25412544. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Murer, M. Jacobsson, S. Skillgate and P. Sundström. 2014. Taking things apart: reaching common ground and shared material understanding. In Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 469--472. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Rau, V. Aleven, N. Rummel and S. Rohrbach. 2013. Why interactive learning environments can have it all: resolving design conflicts between competing goals. In Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 109--118. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Bourdieu. 1984. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- E. Goffman. 1983. The interaction order: American Sociological Association, 1982 presidential address. American sociological review, 48(1), 1--17.Google Scholar
- T. Keisanen and L. Kuure. 2011. Practices of multidisciplinary collaborative work: Wiki document as a boundary object. Kielenkäyttö verkossa ja verkostoissa, 57--71.Google Scholar
- N. Iivari, M. Kinnula, L. Kuure and T. Molin-Juustila. 2014. Video diary as a means for data gathering with children--Encountering identities in the making. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 72(5), 507-Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Molin-Juustila, M. Kinnula, N. Iivari, L. Kuure and E. Halkola. 2015. Multiple voices in ICT design with children--a nexus analytical enquiry. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(11), 1079--1091. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Walsham. 2006. Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems 15, 320--30.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Schwandt. 2000. Three Epistemological Stances for Qualitative Inquiry: Interpretivism, Hermeneutics, and Social Constructionism. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage. 189--214.Google Scholar
- G. Walsham. 1995. Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems 4, 74--81.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln. 2000. Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, 129.Google Scholar
- J. Clifford. 1986. Introduction: Partial Truths. In Writing culture: the poetics and politics of ethnography. University of California Press. 1--26.Google Scholar
- Y. Lincoln and E. Guba. 2000. Paradigmatic Controversies: Contradictions and Emerging Confluences. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage. 163--188.Google Scholar
- S. Deetz. 1996. Crossroads-Describing differences in approaches to organization science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and their legacy. Organization science, 7(2), 191--207. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Pierce, P. Sengers, T. Hirsch, T. Jenkins, W. Gaver and C. DiSalvo. 2015. Expanding and refining design and criticality in HCI. In Proc. 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2083--2092. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Yip. 2007. Self?reflection in reflective practice: a Jaspers' orientation. Reflective practice 8(2), 285--298Google Scholar
- L. Suchman. 1996. Supporting articulation work. Computerization and controversy: Value conflicts and social choices, 2, 407--423. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Power Struggles and Disciplined Designers - A Nexus Analytic Inquiry on Cross-Disciplinary Research and Design
Recommendations
An analysis and critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach
DIS '10: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive SystemsThe field of HCI is experiencing a growing interest in Research through Design (RtD), a research approach that employs methods and processes from design practice as a legitimate method of inquiry. We are interested in expanding and formalizing this ...
Problems in Practice: Understanding Design Research by Critiquing Cases
CHI EA '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsResponding to challenges to better understand design research practice, its contributions to knowledge production and its value to HCI, our one-day workshop critically reflects on case examples of design research practice in interdisciplinary HCI ...
An Annotated Portfolio on Doing Postphenomenology Through Research Products
DIS '18: Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems ConferenceIn this paper, we argue for framing the crafting and studying of research products as doing philosophy through things. We do this by creating an annotated portfolio of such Research through Design (RtD) artifact inquiries as postphenomenological ...
Comments