Theme 5- Pre Seminar

1.How can media technologies be evaluated?

Media technologies can be evaluated using many different approaches. In the study by Réhman et al. 2008 they evaluated a prototype of their concepts with user tests. In these tests they aimed to evaluate the usability of the concept using the aspects effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction. This approach seems like a good choice to me, to evaluate usability using several perspectives. Usability is an important concept in many parts of media technology and a concept which in important to evaluate.

Media technology could also be evaluated using a pure technological approach. A user is often involved in media technology, but it cold also be pure machine to machine communication. In such a case it could be effectively evaluated without involving a user but otherwise user tests feels like an important part of evaluating media technology.

2.What role will prototypes play in research?

It depends heavily on the type of research being performed. In the field of media technology, and many others, prototypes let you perform test and get a more hands on approach in your research. When evaluating for example usability being able to present a user with an actual prototype is important if one is not evaluating an existing product. When a user is presented with a prototype it is easier to find flaws and receive relevant feedback than if simply presented with a concept.

3.Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

A proof of concept prototype could be important in order to show that a product is achievable. Instead of creating an entire product one creates a proof of concept which shows that the concept has potential for real world application. Such a prototype can be tested and reviewed before an actual real life product is created, making changes to a prototype is often cheaper than developing a fully functioning product and then go about reviewing and making changes [1].

4.What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

A prototype is a model of something from which new prototypes and in the end a finished product can be developed. It can take many forms, such as software and hardware in different combinations. Various tests are performed on the prototype in order to gain information that will be useful when creating the finished product.

The main limitation of prototypes is that they are just prototypes, one prefers to not spend more time and money than necessary on it in order to maximize efficiency. Therefore a prototype will always have compromises and there is a risk that the limitations found during tests it due to the fact that a prototype is used and not a finished product. A prototype cannot remove all risk involved when developing a product since it is not a finished product.

5. How can design research be communicated/presented?

It can be presented through research papers such as the ones we read for this theme. Researchers can also create a prototype or product based on the findings in their research and present it in such a way. The Furhat Head being developed here at KTH comes to mind as an example.

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

The empirical data in “Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space” by Fernaeus and Tholander is the empirical data gained when observing the children try out the system, interact with the physical objects and the screen.

In “Differentiating Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the ‘Guess-O-Meter’ in Electric Cars” by Lundström gathers data through interviews and observation and analyzing of online forums.

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

I believe practical design work can be considered a knowledge contribution! We can gain knowledge through experience, a posteriori, when doing practical design work. The finding can then be used in relation to what is already known about the subject and therefore contribute with knowledge.

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

In a research project the design intentions are often of an exploratory character, the hope is to gain knowledge though the design and the testing of it. Design in general to me is not aimed at gaining knowledge to the same extent; here one is often hoping to simply solve a problem using design, while in design research the problem itself is explored as well as a solution.

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?

In my opinion one could try to replicate research like this if the method is fully explained, but it feels like the result would vary to a greater extent than in other areas of research. Technology moves forward in such a pace so that the conditions of the research would change quickly, testing on users would also change due to the knowledge of the users and the technology they are used to.

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

The design driven research is often user-oriented to a degree which is selfdom found in other areas. It is not as often about finding the “answer” to a hypothesis but rather to explore a concept.

[1] https://www.techopedia.com/definition/4066/proof-of-concept-poc