Theme 5, Design Research (Pre-blog)

Part I

Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration

(Réhman, Sun, Liu. and Li, 2008)

How can media technologies be evaluated?

The article synchronized a mobile phone with the ball in a football game, so that the user can experience the movements of the ball. For that a usability test was conducted. This evaluation of media technologies was done from 3 point’s of views. Effectiveness, which was about the question if a task could be completed with the specified system. This was indivated by the success to failure ratio. Second, the efficiancy was evaluated by taking the reaction time if a user as an indicator of efficiency. How much effort does this require?
The third aspect is satisfaction, which refers to the comfort of the system to its users, meaning one can observe how useres interact with the system and measure through a questionaire (e.g. Is this application interesting?).

What role will prototypes play in research?

If I understand this correctly, prototypes in research are used to create ideas and to collect data for a scientific paper. Prototypes already play an important role in research, as they are the basis of future models. With these, researchers can test new alternatives to check the efficiancy and satisfaction of a model and can identify new ideas based on feedback.  

In media & communication research this is done for example before a survey is distributed. The survey itself is a "prototype" which will be reviewed by several other researchers and potential participants, so that possible errors or misunderstandings can be clarified and corrected. Only after that the „finished“ survey can be distributed among the participants without any further concerns.

Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

It is necessary to develop a proof of concept (POC) prototype in order to be sure, that certain theories or concepts can be applied in the real world. With that the feasability can be proven. Also, it helps to provide insights on how the prototype can be improved.

What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

Prototypes are meant to show what the final end product could look like. Since it’s only one version of it, there might be flaws. Through extensive testing they can be eliminated, which also changes the product.

How can design research be communicated/presented?

The best way might be to visualize the prototypes, concepts and results in the research paper, so it’s easier to imagine how the design research was conducted. This can be done through graphs, pictures or sketches.

Part II

Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space (Fernaeus & Tholander, 2008)

Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars (Lundström, A. , 2014)

What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?

Fernaeus and Tholander’s paper on „Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space“ uses a qualitative analysis of design prototypes and of staged activities with children using these prototypes. In previous research it has been normal to involve children as informers, but this study chose to involce the children in productive use of technology.

In Lundström’s article about „Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars“ he uses a variety of methods to explore problems that drivers experience with with the information that is available in electric cars. First there was a pre-study, where they performed a state-of-art-analysis of discourse in online forums and interviews.  As they wanted to understand what affects the driving range, they designed and implemented a proof-of-concept to explore the feasibility of the concepts.

Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?

I would say yes. Every step towards knowledge is a contribution, no matter in what form it comes. As we discussed earlier, even theory is a form of practice, as you are thinking and looking at something. So just because practical design work involves the term ”design” it doesn’t mean it excludes knowledge contribution.

Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?

Within a research project it’s not just about the design, but also about so many other factors that have to be considered as influence factors. Here, a researcher has to conduct pre-analyses to gain more information before actually conducting anything. I figure that it’s not that complicated in design in general.

Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?

I am sure they are replicable. Of course, as it’s the same with any other research, a replication of a project highly depends on the objectivity and skills of the researcher himself. There’s not to be any personal involvement or subjectiveness in the matter of replication. Everything should be copied 1:1 as it has been done before in order to ensure the same result. So for this matter, of course time has a great role, as technology evolves everyday. That means, some things might only be replicable for a short period of time before technology advances again.

Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?

The research process differs. In design driven research phenomenas are observed, then a design is chosen, which will be prototyped first. After that, it will get tested with a audience. After that, the process repeats itself.

Scientific research, as discussed in theme 4 has no prototypes and designs, but chooses between quantitative or qualitative method and drives from one theory. Hypotheses are formulated to narrow the research topic. Results are reported and a discussion follows.

Sources

Réhman, S., Sun, J., Liu, L., & Li, H. (2008). Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 10(6), 1022-1033

Fernaeus, Y., Tholander, J. (2008). Finding Design Qualities in aTangible Programming Space. 

Lundström, A. (2014). Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring aSolution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars