Turn your Mobile Into he Ball : Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration (S. Rehman, J. Sun, L. Liu, H. Li)
Media technologies, and generally any product directed towards human use, should have at some point in the design cycle a phase of user-evaluation, in a Usability Lab (for example LUTIN in La Villette, France). Indeed, we used to have conception models that were basically system-centered - like the Waterfall model, V or the Spiral model, that resulted in products which interfaces were all but ergonomic, or user-friendly. Now, we've learned about participative conception, where we adapt the technology and science to the user, and not the other way around, thanks to the immediate feedback of users - their evaluation of the technology, that's used for the next update, next modification.
In this sense, prototypes are a vital tool in design research : without them, users wouldn't be able to evaluate the media technology at hand, and it would render the whole process fruitless. Generally, because we usually need a feedback at each step of our design, we'd be forced to have a prototype for each step. Now, this is made possible thanks to the various and multiple shapes prototypes can take : indeed, we don't have to design a fully functional and physical prototype for every step, even if this would be very welcome. For the beginning stages of design, concept prototypes that show the appearance, the general idea, look-and-feel of the product would be enough. Then, little by little, based on the feedback and the new ideas that emerge, research will go towards building a prototype that's functional, testable, and of high fidelity. In order to show the evolution of the product, the team can show the different prototypes and response they drew in a target group of test-users. Indeed, said group has to be a sample of professionally apt people, that test prototypes accordingly to personas they've created. This can of course prove to be quite tricky, as this is highly subjective - that's why to needs to be done by people who we can rely on.
Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space (Fernaeus & Tholander), Differentiated Driving Range (Lundström)
In the first paper, Fernaeus and Tholander record the children playing with the prototype - in this case, the empirical data is the children's response to the prototype, which is immediate and free of any thought, because it's collected as soon as it's out. In the second paper, the empirical data is the thought and analysis contribution Nissan drivers share in their forum and blog posts.
In my opinion, practical design work can be considered as knowledge contribution because it's adding up to what the designer knows about the prototype - like said earlier, the need for some "fresh eye" is undeniable in the case of object evaluation : feedback is mandatory for design research, and in that sense I consider said feedback to be knowledge contribution.
Within a research project, I believe the main goal would be to discover something - to learn more about the world and about mankind, as we've talked about in Theme 2. On the other hand, in terms of design "in general", which I believe refers to design for the industry, the focus is to create something that can be produced, sold, and used. In this sense, design intentions vary from one group to the other : while research design can produce something that's not "viable" in the sense that it's not a finished and sold-able product, production design in general often has a fully working product as their ultimate outcome.
The funny thing is that very often, design research ideas are inspiring production design, and the first prototypes eventually end up being the very first children of a big family of working, used, and trendy new objects.
In my opinion, practical design work can be considered as knowledge contribution because it's adding up to what the designer knows about the prototype - like said earlier, the need for some "fresh eye" is undeniable in the case of object evaluation : feedback is mandatory for design research, and in that sense I consider said feedback to be knowledge contribution.
Within a research project, I believe the main goal would be to discover something - to learn more about the world and about mankind, as we've talked about in Theme 2. On the other hand, in terms of design "in general", which I believe refers to design for the industry, the focus is to create something that can be produced, sold, and used. In this sense, design intentions vary from one group to the other : while research design can produce something that's not "viable" in the sense that it's not a finished and sold-able product, production design in general often has a fully working product as their ultimate outcome.
The funny thing is that very often, design research ideas are inspiring production design, and the first prototypes eventually end up being the very first children of a big family of working, used, and trendy new objects.
0 comments:
Post a Comment