Abstract

The field of Participatory Design (PD) has greatly diversified and we see a broad spectrum of approaches and methodologies emerging. However, to foster its role in designing future interactive technologies, a discussion about accountability and rigour across this spectrum is needed. Rejecting the traditional, positivistic framework, we take inspiration from related fields such as Design Research and Action Research to develop interpretations of these concepts that are rooted in PD׳s own belief system. We argue that unlike in other fields, accountability and rigour are nuanced concepts that are delivered through debate, critique and reflection. A key prerequisite for having such debates is the availability of a language that allows designers, researchers and practitioners to construct solid arguments about the appropriateness of their stances, choices and judgements.To this end, we propose a “tool-to-think-with” that provides such a language by guiding designers, researchers and practitioners through a process of systematic reflection and critical analysis. The tool proposes four lenses to critically reflect on the nature of a PD effort: epistemology, values, stakeholders and outcomes. In a subsequent step, the coherence between the revealed features is analysed and shows whether they pull the project in the same direction or work against each other. Regardless of the flavour of PD, we argue that this coherence of features indicates the level of internal rigour of PD work and that the process of reflection and analysis provides the language to argue for it. We envision our tool to be useful at all stages of PD work: in the planning phase, as part of a reflective practice during the work, and as a means to construct knowledge and advance the field after the fact. We ground our theoretical discussions in a specific PD experience, the ECHOES project, to motivate the tool and to illustrate its workings.

Highlights

  • As approaches to designing interactive technology evolve, we continue to see a paradigm shift from the historical engineering mindset, with its focus on requirements, tasks and efficiency, to a holistic, social, situated and human-centred view (Harrison et al, 2011)

  • It is here that this article aims to make its main contribution: we propose a conceptual framework to support designers, researchers and practitioners conducting Participatory Design work to engage in a process of critical reflection and, as such, give them the language needed to convey the rigour and accountability of their work

  • We argue that the quality and coherence of solutions that Participatory Design (PD) work finds in dealing with these challenges and tensions can be seen as prime indicator for its internal rigour

Read more

Summary

Introduction

As approaches to designing interactive technology evolve, we continue to see a paradigm shift from the historical engineering mindset, with its focus on requirements, tasks and efficiency, to a holistic, social, situated and human-centred view (Harrison et al, 2011). User-Centred Design and Participatory Design (UCD and PD) approaches have seen significant uptake in recent years. Participatory Design has been re-interpreted and adapted for different design contexts and purposes and we nowadays see a wide spectrum of philosophies. While the historical traits of PD, rooted in the political struggle of labour movements in Scandinavia (Bødker et al, 1987), are more visible on the idealistic end of the spectrum, pragmatic interpretations have focused increasingly on effective design and participation as a means for matching user needs with the affordances of new technologies

Objectives
Methods
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call