How can media technologies be evaluated?
In the paper they mention system evaluation, and for that they name three types:
Experimental Platform, which is basically presenting the platform that is going to be used in detail.
Usability evaluation, where they reference ISO recommendations for usability. The recommendations were effectiveness which is about whether or not a task can be accomplished on a specific system. Efficiency which is about how much effort that is needed to complete the task.
Finally satisfaction that is about the attitude the participants have towards the used system, if it worked well for them and so forth.
What role will prototypes play in research?
A prototype is used to prove the functionality of the final product. It's usually more basic and less artistically appealing than the final product, but it should have the basic functionality of the intended final product. For a test like this a prototype is very good to have since in early stages of production a developer needs to have feedback from the plausible customers themselves.
Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?
It's more important if it's developed in cooperation with the customer. Then a product is developed with the help of the customer and the proof of concept is to show how the product will function. A proof of concept prototype could decide whether or not a customer would actually buy the final product or not.
What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?
It's basic and should be easy to use/understand by the users. It's functional and should provide enough information for the user to use it efficiently. It has limited functionality since the focus is on the basics of the thought to be final product. Also, the design isn't necessarily very advanced in any sense. Functionality is key.
How can design research be communicated/presented?
Not sure how to understand this question, but through a paper like this works.
It's hard with design since it very subjective and hard to quantify.
The second part of the reflections that is of the other two papers
Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution?
I would say so, yes. When working with practical design we need to understand how humans interact and react to it. Knowledge about human interaction with the design that is to say.
Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?
Both aims to aid human interaction with certain technologies/things in general. A good design, whether it be in a research project or designing a book, wants to interest the user. I'd say that the difference between the two is that in research projects the design is very much often more basic and tries to mostly aim at being functional while design in general tries to stimulate human senses.
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?
Yes I believe so. More advanced computation and new, better algorithms in computer science can make a today seemingly hard project, of making an application for example, much easier and more feasible. So it could be investigated more deeply in te future. That is to say that I understood the question correctly, but I guess we'll see in the post-theme reflection!
Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?
Design driven research aims to understand human interaction with technology more. While research in general often brings quantitative studies design research is more qualitative and wants to understand the human nature when interacting with technology/design.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar