The empirical data in both papers consists of the data collected during the observations of the childrens' actions while using the prototype; and participant interviews, analysis of online media such as forums and blogs and what is called 'state of the art analysis', respectively.
Its a somewhat interpretative question whether design work could be considered knowledge distribution, because it is inherently related to the question of what exactly constitutes knowledge. For my part, I would argue that it can be considered as such, primarily because the creators of the design put forward some of their ideas in their work, which could then in turn make the research lead to a further degree of development and thus 'contributing' to the knowledge.
Within the context of a research, design to my mind seems to be more formalized, having relatively specific goals to obtain in order to elude corresponding specific reactions from the subjects. It is then less 'open-ended', if you will, i.e. less involved with the general experience and more with a specific isolated part of that.
Research in tech domains may or may not be replicable, depending on whether aspects such as historicity, skills of the designers, available tools - or anything dependent thereon - are relevant variables within the context of the research.
Lastly, compared to other kinds of research, design research is less focused on contributing to knowledge in general, and more about adapting a specific kind of product or research to serve the needs or demands at that specific point at time. It is therefore less timeless and unchanging, but at the same time more related to the at that moment current everyday society.
No comments:
Post a Comment