Theme 5: Design research

There are of course a lot of different ways that media technology can be evaluated since it is a big area. But, since questions about user experience and usability are predominant in media technology, I think that testing and an iterative design process often are really important. To let the people that are your target audience test your product for example is critical in order to make it user friendly. Prototypes are an excellent way to gather data from users without having to develop a full product. It saves a lot of time and lets the researchers easily modify and redesign their product and method in an easy way. If your theory or concept is complex or maybe never has been done before a proof of concept prototype could be used. This prototype’s purpose is not to simulate the look and feel of the final product but rather just to prove that the theory is feasible.

One obvious limitation of prototypes are the simplicity of them. Because they are not the final product, they will not work like the final product and that could generate misleading data. It is important to be very distinct in how you present changes in the design research. Changes should make sense and reconnect with what the participants in the user test were saying and thinking. It is important that everyone understands the design changes that are made.

For the second part of this theme we had to read two texts, “Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space - Fernaeus & Tholander” and “Differentiated Driving Range - Lundström”. They are both good examples of articles about a design research. The empirical data are the knowledge about what works and what does not work. Also, why something works and why something else does not work. The common denominator in all these texts are that they are trying to convey information in the easiest way possible and I would say that an iterative design process is an excellent choice of method for this. We have to bear in mind that all these design decisions are just one way to do it that worked. It is not to say that the final product is the best way to do it, it is just the way that this particular research ended with. I would say that it is very unlikely that the research could be replicated since the user test input, design choices etc. will probably not be the same. Even though the research starts with exactly the same conditions it could end in a totally different way.