{"title":"Evaluating the efficacy and effectiveness of design methods: A systematic review and assessment framework","authors":"Philip Cash, Jaap Daalhuizen, Paul Hekkert","doi":"10.1016/j.destud.2023.101204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The increasingly transdisciplinary context of design, where designers collaborate with other disciplinary and domain experts, means there is a growing need to evidence the effectiveness of design methods. We address this need in two ways. First, we propose a ‘chain of evidence’, from motivation to claims, operationalising this in a systematic assessment framework. Second, we systematically review current design method research. Our results reveal that while all links in the chain of evidence are reported across the literature and best practices can be identified, no individual paper either reports all links or consistently achieves best practice. Our framework and results demonstrate the need for standards of evidence in this area, with implications for design method research, development, education, and practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50593,"journal":{"name":"Design Studies","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 101204"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Studies","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X23000455","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The increasingly transdisciplinary context of design, where designers collaborate with other disciplinary and domain experts, means there is a growing need to evidence the effectiveness of design methods. We address this need in two ways. First, we propose a ‘chain of evidence’, from motivation to claims, operationalising this in a systematic assessment framework. Second, we systematically review current design method research. Our results reveal that while all links in the chain of evidence are reported across the literature and best practices can be identified, no individual paper either reports all links or consistently achieves best practice. Our framework and results demonstrate the need for standards of evidence in this area, with implications for design method research, development, education, and practice.
期刊介绍：
Design Studies is a leading international academic journal focused on developing understanding of design processes. It studies design activity across all domains of application, including engineering and product design, architectural and urban design, computer artefacts and systems design. It therefore provides an interdisciplinary forum for the analysis, development and discussion of fundamental aspects of design activity, from cognition and methodology to values and philosophy.
Design Studies publishes work that is concerned with the process of designing, and is relevant to a broad audience of researchers, teachers and practitioners. We welcome original, scientific and scholarly research papers reporting studies concerned with the process of designing in all its many fields, or furthering the development and application of new knowledge relating to design process. Papers should be written to be intelligible and pertinent to a wide range of readership across different design domains. To be relevant for this journal, a paper has to offer something that gives new insight into or knowledge about the design process, or assists new development of the processes of designing.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
