Volume 11 · Number 1 · Pages 8–21

< Previous Paper · Next Paper >

Developing a Dialogical Platform for Disseminating Research through Design

Abigail C. Durrant, John Vines, Jayne Wallace & Joyce Yee

Download the full text in
PDF (2229 kB)

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Context: Practice-based design research is becoming more widely recognized in academia, including at doctoral level, yet there are arguably limited options for dissemination beyond the traditional conference format of paper-based proceedings, possibly with an exhibition or “demonstrator” component that is often non-archival. Further, the opportunities afforded by the traditional-format paper presentations is at times at odds with practice-based methodologies being presented. Purpose: We provide a first-hand descriptive account of developing and running a new international conference with an experimental format that aims to support more analogously the dissemination of practice-based design research. Method: Our approach herein is broadly interpretative, phenomenological and critically reflective in orientation, to analyze our own experiential insights from the conference conception, through to the event itself and post-conference reflections, alongside the reflections fed back by conference delegates. Results: We have found the roundtable format continues to function well for creating a discursive interactional context. However issues arose around the crucial nature of the session chair’s role in enabling rich and multi-voiced discussion and how presenters’, organizers’ and delegates’ voices were captured and documented, with implications for further developing the conference design. Looking forward, there are also questions raised about: balancing the stringency of a rigorous review process with provision of an encouraging platform for early-career researchers; and balancing the need for clear criteria and formatting standards (for assessing quality and rigor in submitted work) with the “openness” of the submission template and formatting guidelines (to encourage pioneering developments in visual argumentation. Implications: The article provides a valuable resource for practice-based design researchers who are committed to generating research understanding through applied endeavors (making things) and/or writing. This includes designers who are new to research cultures. It should also appeal to those working in interdisciplinary research in collaboration with design practitioners (but who may not be practitioners themselves. The conference aims to foster and support a burgeoning “research through design” academic community and to provide a fitting dissemination platform for this community. We hope that the conference will encourage academic communities to give proper consideration to the concept of design as a knowledge-generating activity. Constructivist content: Knowledge about design research is generated from meaningful interaction between people and artifacts as part of the unfolding conference experience. The organizational features of the conference aim to support knowledge dissemination through dialogical relations between people and things in particular contexts of interaction.

Key words: Research through design, practice-based research, dialogical relationships, embodied knowledge, new materialities, discursive dissemination platform


Durrant A. C., Vines J., Wallace J. & Yee J. (2015) Developing a dialogical platform for disseminating research through design. Constructivist Foundations 11(1): 8–21. http://constructivist.info/11/1/008

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

Similar articles

Durrant A. C., Vines J., Wallace J. & Yee J. (2015) Authors’ Response: Balancing Openness and Structure in Conference Design to Support a Burgeoning Research Community


Anderson C. (2013) Makers: the new industrial revolution. Random House Business, London. << Google Scholar

Archer B. (1995) The nature of research. Co-Design 2(11): 6–13. << Google Scholar

Biggs M. & Büchler D. (2007) Rigour and practice-based research. Design Issues 23(3): 62–69. << Google Scholar

Biggs M. (2000) Editorial: The foundations of practice-based research. Working Papers in Art and Design, 1, 2000. << Google Scholar

Blevis E., Hauser S. & Odom W. (2015) Sharing the hidden treasure in pictorials. Interactions 22(3): 32–43. << Google Scholar

Bowers J. (2012) The logic of annotated portfolios: Communicating the value of “research through design.” In: Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems conference. The ACM Press, New York: 68–77. << Google Scholar

Callon M. (1991) Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In: Law J. (ed.) A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination. Routledge, London: 132–161. << Google Scholar

Chow R. (2005) Evolution, epigenesis, and recycling in design theorizing. In: Jonas W., Chow R. & Verhaag N. (eds.) (2005) Design – system – evolution: The application of systemic and evolutionary approaches to design theory, design practice, design research and design education. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of the European Academy of Design (EAD06) Available at http://ead.verhaag.net/conference/

Chow R. (2010) What should be done with the different versions of Research through Design. In: Mareis C., Joost G. & Kimpel K. (eds.) Entwerfen. Wissen. Produzieren. Designforschung im Anwendungskontext. Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld: 145–158. << Google Scholar

Cross N. (2001) Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design issues 17(3): 49–55. << Google Scholar

de Mul J. (2011) Redesigning design. In: van Abel B., Evers L., Klaassen R., & Troxler P. (eds.) Open design now: Why design cannot remain exclusive. BIS Publishers, Amsterdam: 34–39. << Google Scholar

DeLanda M. (2006) A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. Academic, Bloomsbury UK. << Google Scholar

Deleuze G. & Guattari F. (2004) A thousand plateaus. New edition translated by Brian Massumi. Continuum, London. French original published in 1980. << Google Scholar

Dewey J. (1986) Logic: The theory of inquiry. Southern Illinois University Press: Carbondale. << Google Scholar

Dunne A. & Raby F. (2013) Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. << Google Scholar

Durling D. (2000) Reliable knowledge in design. Working Papers in Art and Design 1. Available at https://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/12286/WPIAAD_vol1_durling.pdf

Durling D. (2002) Discourses on research and the Ph.D in design. Quality Assurance in Education 10(2): 79–85. << Google Scholar

Fallman D. (2003) Design-oriented human-computer interaction. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. The ACM Press, New York: 225–232. << Google Scholar

Fallman D. (2008) The interaction design research triangle of design practice, design studies, and design exploration. Design Issues 24(3): 4–18. << Google Scholar

Findeli A. & Bousbaki R. (2005) L’éclipse de l’objet dans les theories du projet en design. The Design Journal VIII(3): 35–49. << Google Scholar

Findeli A. (1998) A quest for credibility: Doctoral education and research in design at the university of Montreal. In: Buchanan R., Doordan D., Justice L. & Margolin V. (eds.) Doctoral education in design. Proceedings of the Ohio conference 8–11 October 1998: 99–116. << Google Scholar

Findeli A. (2008) Research through design and transdisciplinarity: A tentative contribution to the methodology of design research. In: Proceedings of Swiss Design Network Symposium “Focused,” Berne, Switzerland: 67–91. << Google Scholar

Findeli A., Brouillet D., Martin S., Moineau C. & Tarrago R. (2008) Research through design and transdisciplinarity: A tentative contribution to the methodology of design research. In: Minder B. (ed.) Focused – Current design research projects and methods. Swiss Design Network, Berne: 67–94. Available at http://swissdesignnetwork.ch/src/publication/focused-current-design-research-projects-and-methods-2008/Focused_SDN.pdf

Frayling C. (1993) Research in art and design. Royal College of Art Research Papers 1 (1): 1–5. << Google Scholar

Friedman K. (2003) Theory construction in design research: Criteria: approaches, and methods. Design Studies 24: 507–522. << Google Scholar

Friedman K. (2008) Research into, by and for design. Journal of Visual Art Practice 7(2): 153–160. << Google Scholar

Gaver B. & Bowers J. (2012) Annotated portfolios. Interactions 19(4): 40–49. << Google Scholar

Gaver W. (2011) Making spaces: How design workbooks work. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. The ACM Press, New York: 1551–1560. << Google Scholar

Gaver W. (2012) What should we expect from research through design? In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, New York: 937–946. << Google Scholar

Gedenryd H. (1998) How designers work: Cognitive studies. Ph.D dissertation, Lund University. Available at http://www.lucs.lu.se/People/Henrik.Gedenryd/HowDesignersWork

Glanville R. (1997) A ship without a rudder. In: Glanville R. & de Zeeuw G. (eds.) Problems of excavating cybernetics and systems. BKS+, Southsea: 131–142. << Google Scholar

Ingold T. (2013) Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. Routledge, Abingdon. << Google Scholar

Jonas W. & Meyer-Veden J. (2004) Mind the gap! – On knowing and not–knowing in design. Hauschild-Verlag, Bremen. << Google Scholar

Jonas W. (2007) Design research and its meaning to the methodological development of the discipline. In: Michel R. (ed.) Design research now. Birkhäuser, Basel: 187–206. << Google Scholar

Jonas W. (2007) Research through DESIGN through research: A cybernetic model of designing design foundations. Kybernetes 36 (9/10): 1362–1380. << Google Scholar

Jonas W. (2014) A cybernetic model of design research. Towards a trans-domain of knowing. In: Rodgers P. A. & Yee J. (eds.) The Routledge companion to design research. Routledge, London: 23–37. << Google Scholar

Jonas W. (2015) Social transformation design as Research Through Design (RTD): Some historical, theoretical and methodological remarks. In: Jonas W., Zerwas S. & von Anshelm K. (eds.) Transformation design: Perspectives on a new design attitude. Birkhäuser, Basel: 114–133. << Google Scholar

Kolb D. A. (1984) Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, New York. << Google Scholar

Koskinen I., Zimmerman J., Binder T., Redstrom J. & Wensveen S. (2011) Design research through practice: From the lab, field, and showroom. Elsevier, New York. << Google Scholar

Latour B. (1993) We have never been modern. Translated by Catherine Porter. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. French original published in 1991. << Google Scholar

Löwgren J. (1995) Applying design methodology to software development. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on designing interactive systems. ACM Press, New York: 87–95. << Google Scholar

Mantel H. (2009) Wolf hall. HarperCollins, London. << Google Scholar

Nelson H. G. & Stolterman E. (2003) The design way. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs. << Google Scholar

Niedderer K. & Roworth-Stokes S. (2007) The role and use of creative practice in research and its contribution to knowledge. In: Proceedings of the Second Conference of International Association of Societies of Design Research. Polytechnic University, Hong Kong: 1–18. Available at http://niedderer.org/IASDR07SRS.pdf

Niedderer K. (2007) Mapping the meaning of knowledge in design research. Design Research Quarterly 2: 5–13. << Google Scholar

Owen C. (1998) Design research: Building the knowledge base. Design Studies 19: 9–20. << Google Scholar

Pierce J., Sengers P., Hirsch T., Jenkins T., Gaver W. & DiSalvo C. (2015) Expanding and refining design and criticality in HCI. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, Seoul (South Korea): 2083–2092. << Google Scholar

Read H. (1943) Education through art. Faber and Faber, London. << Google Scholar

Rittel H. W. J. & Webber M. M. (1972) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Institute of Urban and Regional Development Working Paper 194. University of California, Berkeley. << Google Scholar

Rittel H. W. J. & Webber M. M. (1984) Planning problems are wicked problems. In: Cross N. (ed.) Developments in design methodology. John Wiley & Sons, New York: 135–144. Originally published in 1973. << Google Scholar

Rust C. (2007) Unstated contributions – how artistic inquiry can inform interdisciplinary research. International Journal of Design 1(3): 69–76. << Google Scholar

Rust C., Mottram J. & Till J. (2007) AHRC research review practice-led research in art, design and architecture. Arts and Humanities Research Council, UK. Available at http://shura.shu.ac.uk/7596/

Schön D. (1983) The reflective practitioner. Basic Books, New York. << Google Scholar

Schön D. (1991) The reflective practitioner. Paperback Edition. Ashgate, Farnham UK. Originally published in 1983. << Google Scholar

Simon H. A. (1969) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. << Google Scholar

Stirling B. (2005) Shaping things. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. << Google Scholar

Stolterman E. (2008) The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design 2(1): 55–65. << Google Scholar

Swann C. (2002) Action research and the practice of design. Design Issues 18(1): 49–61. << Google Scholar

Twigger Holroyd A. (2015) Re-knitting: Exploring openness through design. In: Proceedings of the Second Biennial Research Through Design conference, 25–27 March 2015, Cambridge UK: Article 33. << Google Scholar

van Abel B., Evers L., Klaassen R. & Troxler P. (eds.) (2011) Open design now: Why design cannot remain exclusive. BIS Publishers, Amsterdam. << Google Scholar

Wallace J., Yee J. & Durrant A. (2014) Reflections on a synergistic format for disseminating research through design. In: Extended Abstracts of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, New York: 781–790. << Google Scholar

Wolf T., Rode J., Sussman J. & Kellogg W. (2006) Dispelling “design” as the black art of CHI. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, New York: 521–530. << Google Scholar

Yee J., Jefferies E. & Tan L. (2013) Design transitions: Inspiring stories. Global viewpoints. How design is changing. BIS, Amsterdam. << Google Scholar

Zimmerman J., Stolterman E. & Forlizzi J. (2010) An analysis and critique of Research through Design. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS’10) ACM Press, Aarhus (Denmark): 310–319. << Google Scholar

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.