Theme 5: Design research

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

In the two papers assigned for this theme, and for all other research too, empirical data can be defined as knowledge and information gathered by experimentation, experience or observation. The concept is about finding new knowledge, which may contribute to new insights about the world.

Fernaeus and Tholander acquired their qualitative, empirical data with the help of a prototype. The two researchers documented their observations of how children interacted with their prototype, and from the gathered data they could draw conclusions.

In Lundström’s paper, a prototype was used as well. Empirical data is also collected by the of performing interviews and tests on electric cars available on the market.

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

That a research process which is focused on design is, at least according to Lundström, a knowledge contribution in itself. Because after all, the process of first developing, and later testing and analyzing the proof-of-concept, most often leads to the discovery (and realization of) various before unknown factors.

Practical design work can help researchers (and peers) to understand both the problem and eventual solutions of a research matter. I believe that this is a great knowledge contribution; by going deeper into the process of attaining the knowledge, the understanding of it must increase. This visualizing of the problem can help put light on new perspectives, which possibly will generate even more new information and knowledge than less design-oriented research.

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

There are several differences between general design and research oriented design intentions. When speaking of design intentions within a research project, the design is a tool for attaining knowledge and insights within a chosen issue/problem. By visualizing it, researchers may acquire knowledge about issues and processes with the help of well-considered design. The design requires pre-work and testing in order to be considered suitable.

Design in general, on the other hand, is less process-oriented and more focused on aesthetics, functionality or optimization. Here, the design is about the development of a specific product, rather than about understanding an already existing phenomena.

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?

Since technology is an ever-evolving field, it is of most importance to discuss the processes within it with the fast development in mind. Time and historical setting is hence important factors to consider when speaking of potential replicability. When, where and by who was the research conducted? In order to replicate a given research process, one must consider how far the development in the field has come since it was original conducted. If this is not considered, the variations in the outcome will be complicated to understand.

With every new insight about efficient solutions for research conduction, new conditions come along with it. It is consequently important to note and reflect on the conditions under which a specific research was compiled.

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

The most important difference between design driven research and other research practices is found in its intention. Design driven research strives to understand and improve processes rather than just deepening the knowledge of specific issues, as in many other research practices. Additionally, design driven research normally works with qualitative data in its empirics. In less design driven research processes, quantitative methods are also common in the data collection.