Theme 5: Design Research

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

First we have to take a look at what empirical data is in general. Empirical data is the information that is collected in a scientific research. The way how the researchers are getting access to the data (interviews, surveys, observations, analyses, etc.) can vary and depend on the used methodology. The raw empirical data in used in researches to answer hypotheses (quantitative) or form hypotheses (qualitative). Only through the interpretation of this data new knowledge can be formed.

The empirical data in the first paper (Designing for Tangible Interactions) are the observations of children using the design prototypes and their staged activities. This information was gathered and analyzed in a next step to make it usable for its purposes.

In the second paper (Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter“ in Electric Cars) the empirical data looks differently. Here the empirical data is collected on different ways. The information provided by state-of-the-art analysis including an online research about about user interfaces and product reviews was used in the beginning. Further the information provided by an analysis of discourse in online forums gave an additional perspective about the electric car range and opinions about it. The last piece of empirical data was collected through interviews with experts, early adopters, and other drivers of electric cars. Specifically here the empirical data was formed when the information from the interviews was analyzed based on concrete questions.

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

In the beginning of a research is the research question. After a analyzing the status quo in this topic the researches have to decide in which way they want to answer their question. The way they choose is called research design and it is a framework for the methods to collect data. According to my understanding the practical design work is the process to find the right methods for answering the research question. This question can mostly have several different ways to be answered. Depending on the research design the approach to the topic can be differently and through that the final outcome can vary. To my mind the process of choosing the right way for a specific research is already a contribution to the desired outcome and through that a knowledge contribution.

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

Design in a research context means the framework that you giving your research to get to a desired outcome. So the design in the way to get something or create new knowledge. Design in general is not so much describing the way how to get somewhere, but more the outcome. This could be for example the design of a product.

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?

Normally research should be replicable. According to the quality criteria of empirical research methods researches should be objective, reliable, and valid. Especially the second criteria, reliability, covers the issue that a research method should be replicable and come to the same conclusions under the same conditions. The problem is that it is almost impossible to replicate a research in the exact same way about the exact same topic. Especially in the field of technology and media this procedure is difficult. There are too many factors that are changing too fast to replicate it appropriately. New technologies are coming up that raise a need for new research tools or technologies bring up new tools that makes it easier to collect specific data. Further the designers could have different previous knowledge than the designers of a first research. In my opinion there are too many variable factors to replicate a research. Further we learned in the lecture of the last theme already that journals don‘t like to accept researches that have been made already, even though this might provide a lot of new knowledge. Anyway this is not a problem of the research itself, but the system.

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

The biggest difference is that in a design driven research you decide on the research framework in advance. You are not as free anymore to change the setting. Compared to that you can be more free in other researches and also change your methods throughout researching.