Cargando…

In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()

The field of Participatory Design (PD) has greatly diversified and we see a broad spectrum of approaches and methodologies emerging. However, to foster its role in designing future interactive technologies, a discussion about accountability and rigour across this spectrum is needed. Rejecting the tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frauenberger, Christopher, Good, Judith, Fitzpatrick, Geraldine, Iversen, Ole Sejer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academic Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26109833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.004
_version_ 1782363634505089024
author Frauenberger, Christopher
Good, Judith
Fitzpatrick, Geraldine
Iversen, Ole Sejer
author_facet Frauenberger, Christopher
Good, Judith
Fitzpatrick, Geraldine
Iversen, Ole Sejer
author_sort Frauenberger, Christopher
collection PubMed
description The field of Participatory Design (PD) has greatly diversified and we see a broad spectrum of approaches and methodologies emerging. However, to foster its role in designing future interactive technologies, a discussion about accountability and rigour across this spectrum is needed. Rejecting the traditional, positivistic framework, we take inspiration from related fields such as Design Research and Action Research to develop interpretations of these concepts that are rooted in PD׳s own belief system. We argue that unlike in other fields, accountability and rigour are nuanced concepts that are delivered through debate, critique and reflection. A key prerequisite for having such debates is the availability of a language that allows designers, researchers and practitioners to construct solid arguments about the appropriateness of their stances, choices and judgements. To this end, we propose a “tool-to-think-with” that provides such a language by guiding designers, researchers and practitioners through a process of systematic reflection and critical analysis. The tool proposes four lenses to critically reflect on the nature of a PD effort: epistemology, values, stakeholders and outcomes. In a subsequent step, the coherence between the revealed features is analysed and shows whether they pull the project in the same direction or work against each other. Regardless of the flavour of PD, we argue that this coherence of features indicates the level of internal rigour of PD work and that the process of reflection and analysis provides the language to argue for it. We envision our tool to be useful at all stages of PD work: in the planning phase, as part of a reflective practice during the work, and as a means to construct knowledge and advance the field after the fact. We ground our theoretical discussions in a specific PD experience, the ECHOES project, to motivate the tool and to illustrate its workings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4375798
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Academic Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43757982015-06-22 In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design() Frauenberger, Christopher Good, Judith Fitzpatrick, Geraldine Iversen, Ole Sejer Int J Hum Comput Stud Article The field of Participatory Design (PD) has greatly diversified and we see a broad spectrum of approaches and methodologies emerging. However, to foster its role in designing future interactive technologies, a discussion about accountability and rigour across this spectrum is needed. Rejecting the traditional, positivistic framework, we take inspiration from related fields such as Design Research and Action Research to develop interpretations of these concepts that are rooted in PD׳s own belief system. We argue that unlike in other fields, accountability and rigour are nuanced concepts that are delivered through debate, critique and reflection. A key prerequisite for having such debates is the availability of a language that allows designers, researchers and practitioners to construct solid arguments about the appropriateness of their stances, choices and judgements. To this end, we propose a “tool-to-think-with” that provides such a language by guiding designers, researchers and practitioners through a process of systematic reflection and critical analysis. The tool proposes four lenses to critically reflect on the nature of a PD effort: epistemology, values, stakeholders and outcomes. In a subsequent step, the coherence between the revealed features is analysed and shows whether they pull the project in the same direction or work against each other. Regardless of the flavour of PD, we argue that this coherence of features indicates the level of internal rigour of PD work and that the process of reflection and analysis provides the language to argue for it. We envision our tool to be useful at all stages of PD work: in the planning phase, as part of a reflective practice during the work, and as a means to construct knowledge and advance the field after the fact. We ground our theoretical discussions in a specific PD experience, the ECHOES project, to motivate the tool and to illustrate its workings. Academic Press 2015-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4375798/ /pubmed/26109833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.004 Text en © 2014 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Frauenberger, Christopher
Good, Judith
Fitzpatrick, Geraldine
Iversen, Ole Sejer
In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title_full In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title_fullStr In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title_full_unstemmed In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title_short In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
title_sort in pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design()
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26109833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.004
work_keys_str_mv AT frauenbergerchristopher inpursuitofrigourandaccountabilityinparticipatorydesign
AT goodjudith inpursuitofrigourandaccountabilityinparticipatorydesign
AT fitzpatrickgeraldine inpursuitofrigourandaccountabilityinparticipatorydesign
AT iversenolesejer inpursuitofrigourandaccountabilityinparticipatorydesign