What should we expect from research through design?

By William W. Gaver. International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2012

1,183 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Mechanical Engineering, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/faeb207c9bb3d02afb69cb4d832e308067519c07

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Kristina Höök
2. Mark Blythe
3. Jonas Löwgren

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Kristina Höök
2. Mark Blythe
3. Jonas Löwgren
4. Tom Yeh
5. Michael Warren Skirpan

In Human-Computer Interaction

1. Kristina Höök
2. Mark Blythe
3. Jonas Löwgren
4. Tom Yeh
5. Michael Warren Skirpan

Citations in the corpus

• Research through design fiction: narrative in real and imaginary abstracts (2014, background): “Field evaluations sometimes position particular designs as “promising approaches” or even best practice [23] however the results are rarely uniform and are often nuanced.”
• Strong concepts: Intermediate-level knowledge in interaction design research (2012, background): “1992], Tapestry [Goldberg et al. 1992], GroupLens [Konstan et al. 1997], and Kalas [Svensson et al. 2001]. These design instances form the body of our understanding of what social navigation is. They embody the strong concept. (2) The next step towards making a strong concept into an academic knowle”