Design & Research Processes
The first two weeks of the course ‘Design <> Research’ in my second year of the bachelor, were all about the Design Process. A case about the ‘talkative’ kitchen was given to us. In this case, we had to design a product that belonged in the ‘talkative’ kitchen and was part of the Internet of Things (IoT). We had to explore the dilemmas in a design case and make use of the Reflective Transformative Design Process (RTDP) to help overcome these dilemmas. Me an my team designed the Smart Tap.
Part two of this course was about the design research process. We had to do a research using our concept. A research paper had to be written. While preparing and conducting the user test, I came across some learning moments. You carefully had to think all the questions and exercises through in order to get the answers you need for your research. I made the cultural probe, where all the wanted answers needed to be transformed in questions and exercises. I had to be both creative with the design as well as creative with the exercises to get the outcome we wanted. I also learned how to write a structured research paper.
In project 2 design, we did quantitative and qualitative research. It could be argued that doing quantitative research in a small-scale project is not very suitable. We received this feedback from our project coach, about our method of using the Stroop test as a variable for the outcome of our user test. A Stroop test gives numerical data. The idea of the Stroop test was good. However the number of participants was too little to say anything for certain. I learned to really think about this is future projects.
For Project 3 research I was in the Studio Silver squad. We were designing and researching for dementia. Project 3 was a research project, therefore research had to be done. Not only field study, but also literature studies to support the hypothesis. I did the literature research for this project, and while I was doing that I learned a lot about referencing and the use of citations. I used secondary references, and I tried my best to show in the text that according to the ‘main papers’ that I was reading that these secondary references also did separate research in the same field. At first, I was not sure how to handle it, but by stating it in the text I think it became quite clear who said what. In this project I learned how to adequately use referencing.
A more challenging part of the research for me, was the methodology of the field research. At first, we tried to do some quantitative research, but when I look back there were major flaws in that methodology, meaning that it was impossible to answer the research question. This could have been avoided, by leaving more time in between the stages of the tests, so there wasn’t a chance of biased answers. Because of this mishap in the methodology we then focused only on our qualitative research. Looking at the interviews we did and the observations we made. In this project I learned to approach methods during research very carefully, because if you don’t think everything through correctly you cannot use the results.
Part two of this course was about the design research process. We had to do a research using our concept. A research paper had to be written. While preparing and conducting the user test, I came across some learning moments. You carefully had to think all the questions and exercises through in order to get the answers you need for your research. I made the cultural probe, where all the wanted answers needed to be transformed in questions and exercises. I had to be both creative with the design as well as creative with the exercises to get the outcome we wanted. I also learned how to write a structured research paper.
In project 2 design, we did quantitative and qualitative research. It could be argued that doing quantitative research in a small-scale project is not very suitable. We received this feedback from our project coach, about our method of using the Stroop test as a variable for the outcome of our user test. A Stroop test gives numerical data. The idea of the Stroop test was good. However the number of participants was too little to say anything for certain. I learned to really think about this is future projects.
For Project 3 research I was in the Studio Silver squad. We were designing and researching for dementia. Project 3 was a research project, therefore research had to be done. Not only field study, but also literature studies to support the hypothesis. I did the literature research for this project, and while I was doing that I learned a lot about referencing and the use of citations. I used secondary references, and I tried my best to show in the text that according to the ‘main papers’ that I was reading that these secondary references also did separate research in the same field. At first, I was not sure how to handle it, but by stating it in the text I think it became quite clear who said what. In this project I learned how to adequately use referencing.
A more challenging part of the research for me, was the methodology of the field research. At first, we tried to do some quantitative research, but when I look back there were major flaws in that methodology, meaning that it was impossible to answer the research question. This could have been avoided, by leaving more time in between the stages of the tests, so there wasn’t a chance of biased answers. Because of this mishap in the methodology we then focused only on our qualitative research. Looking at the interviews we did and the observations we made. In this project I learned to approach methods during research very carefully, because if you don’t think everything through correctly you cannot use the results.
