Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tagging User Research Data: How to Support the Synthesis of Information in Design Teams

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design Thinking Research

Part of the book series: Understanding Innovation ((UNDINNO))

Abstract

In user-centered design processes, one of the most important tasks is to synthesize information from user research into insights and a shared point of view among team members. This paper explores the synthesis process and opportunities for providing computational support. First, we present interviews on the common practices and challenges of information synthesis from people with different levels of experience. Based on these interviews we developed digital whiteboard software for sorting individual segments of user research. The system separates out individual and group activity and helps the team to externalize and synthesize their different views of the data. Through a case study, we explore the differences between computer-supported group interaction and an individual clustering condition. We learned that participants really appreciated an individual working phase before entering a group synthesis phase. Novice designers tended to prefer the structured computer-supported synthesis process that externalizes the different views of each team member. More experienced designers preferred to freely arrange information segments and create clusterings on their own.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Some authors use this term to refer to all activities of assembling or creating the form of the design solution -- in contrast to the term analysis that refers to the activity of investigating and defining the design problem (Alexander 1964; Lawson 2006; Bamford 2002)

References

  • Alexander C (1964) Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews C, Endert A, North C (2010) Space to think: large high-resolution displays for sensemaking. In: Proceedings of CHI ’10, pp 55–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamford G (2002) From analysis/synthesis to conjecture/analysis: a review of Karl Popper’s influence on design methodology in architecture. Des Stud 23(3):245–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer H, Holtzblatt K (1998) Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, p 472

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown T (2009) Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. HarperBusiness, New York, p 272

    Google Scholar 

  • Chau DH, Kittur A, Hong JI, Faloutsos C (2011) Apolo: making sense of large network data by combining rich user interaction and machine learning. In: Proceedings of CHI ’11, pp 167–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng W-H, Gotz D (2009) Context-based page unit recommendation for web-based sensemaking tasks. In: Proceedings of IUI ’09, pp 107–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilton LB, Little G, Edge D, Weld DS, Landay JA (2013) Cascade: crowdsourcing taxonomy creation. In: Proceedings of CHI ’13, pp 1999–2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin JM, Strauss A (1990) Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual Sociol 13(1):3–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropley A (2006) In praise of convergent thinking. Creat Res J 18(3):391–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis P, Heiserman T, Jobusch D, Notess M, Webb J (1999) Customer-focused design data in a large, multi-site organization. In: Proceedings of CHI ’99, pp 608–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman E, Kuniavsky M, Moed A (2012) Observing the user experience: a practitioner’s guide to user research, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, Waltham, MA, p 608

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumienny R, Lindberg T, Meinel C (2011) Exploring the synthesis of information in design processes—opening the black-box. In: Proceedings of ICED ’11, vol 6. pp 446–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Harboe G, Minke J, Ilea I, Huang EM (2012) Computer support for collaborative data analysis: augmenting paper affinity diagrams. In: Proceedings of CSCW ’12, pp 1179–1182

    Google Scholar 

  • Hey JHG, Joyce CK, Beckman SL (2007) Framing innovation: negotiating shared frames during early design phases. J DesRes 6(1/2):79–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Hey J, Yu J, Agogino AM (2008) Design team framing: paths and principles. In: International conference on design theory and methodology, pp 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill AW, Dong A, Agogino AM (2002) Towards computational tools for supporting the reflective team. In: Artificial intelligence in Design ’02, pp 305–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinman R (2011) Getting to meaning through story. Expo. Magic Des. A Pract. Guid. to Methods Theory Synth, pp 67–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg P, Tang A, Carpendale S (2008) An exploratory study of visual information analysis. In: Proceedings of CHI ’08, pp 1217–1226

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge TK, Pyla PS, McCrickard DS, Harrison S (2008) Using multiple display environments for affinity diagramming. In: Workshop on beyond the laboratory: supporting authentic collaboration with multiple displays at CSCW ’08, pp 9–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimoski R, Mohammed S (1994) Team mental model: construct or metaphor? J Manag 20(2):403–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolfschoten GL, Brazier F (2012) Cognitive load in collaboration--convergence. In: International conference on system sciences, pp 129–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolko J (2011) Exposing the magic of design: a practitioner’s guide to the methods and theory of synthesis. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff K (2006) The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson B (2006) How designers think: the design process demystified, 4th edn. Elsevier, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim B-C, Klein KJ (2006) Team mental models and team performance: a field study of the effects of team mental model similarity and accuracy. J Organ Behav 27(4):403–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd P (2000) Storytelling and the development of discourse in the engineering design process. Des Stud 21(4):357–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris MR, Lombardo J, Wigdor D (2010) WeSearch: supporting collaborative search and sensemaking on a tabletop display. In: Proceedings of CSCW ’10, pp 401–410

    Google Scholar 

  • Naumer C, Fisher K, Dervin B (2008) Sense-making: a methodological perspective. In: CHI 2008 workshop Sense-Making, Florence, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak J (2007) Helping knowledge cross boundaries: using knowledge visualization to support cross-community Sensemaking. In: Proceedings of HICSS ’07, pp 38–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Oehlberg L, Roschuni C (2011) A descriptive study of designers’ tools for sharing user needs and conceptual design. In: Proceedings of of ASME DETC ’11, pp 199–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Oehlberg L, Simm K, Jones J, Agogino A, Hartmann B (2012) Showing is sharing: building shared understanding in human-centered design teams with Dazzle. In: Proceedings of DIS ’12, pp 669–678

    Google Scholar 

  • Oehlberg L, Simm K, Jones J, Agogino A, Hartmann B (2012) Showing is sharing: building shared understanding in human-centered design teams with Dazzle. In: Proceedings of the designing interactive systems conference on—DIS ’12, pp 669–678

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirolli P, Card S (2005) The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In: Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis

    Google Scholar 

  • Qu Y, Furnas GW (2005) Sources of structure in sensemaking. In: CHI ’05 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems—CHI ’05, pp 1989–1992

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson AC (2008) Collaborative synthesis of visual analytic results. In: 2008 I.E. symposium on visual analytics science and technology, pp 67–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers Y, Sharp H, Preece J (2011) Interaction design: beyond human—computer interaction. Wiley, New York, p 585

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell DM, Stefik MJ, Pirolli P, Card SK (1993) The cost structure of sensemaking. In: Proceedings of INTERACT ’93 and CHI ’93, pp 269–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön D (1984) Problems, frames and perspectives on designing. Des Stud 5(3):132–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumann J, Shih PC, Redmiles DF, Horton G (2012) Supporting initial trust in distributed idea generation and idea evaluation. In: Proceedings of GROUP ’12, pp 199–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma N (2011) Role of available and provided resources in sensemaking. In: Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems—CHI ’11, p 1807

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrinivasan YB, van Wijk JJ (2008) Supporting the analytical reasoning process in information visualization. In: Proceedings of CHI ’08, pp 1237–1246

    Google Scholar 

  • Umapathy K (2010) Requirements to support Collaborative Sensemaking. In: CSCW CIS workshop, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace JR, Scott SD, Macgregor CG (2013) Collaborative Sensemaking on a digital tabletop and personal tablets: prioritization, comparisons, and tableaux. In: CHI ’13, pp 3345–3354

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright W, Schroh D, Proulx P, Skaburskis A, Cort B (2006) The Sandbox for analysis: concepts and methods. In: Proceedings of CHI ’06, pp 801–810

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hasso-Plattner-Institute, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, 14482, Germany

    Raja Gumienny, Matthias Wenzel & Lutz Gericke

  2. HCI Institute Carnegie Mellon University, 3615 Newell Simon Hall, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Steven Dow

  3. Hasso-Plattner-Institute for Software Systems Engineering, Campus Griebnitzsee, Potsdam, 14482, Germany

    Christoph Meinel

Authors
  1. Raja Gumienny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven Dow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthias Wenzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lutz Gericke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christoph Meinel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raja Gumienny .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Campus Griebnitzsee, Hasso Plattner Institute for Software Systems Engineering, Potsdam, Germany

    Hasso Plattner

  2. Campus Griebnitzsee, Hasso Plattner Institute for Software Systems Engineering, Potsdam, Germany

    Christoph Meinel

  3. Center for Design Research (CDR), Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

    Larry Leifer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gumienny, R., Dow, S., Wenzel, M., Gericke, L., Meinel, C. (2015). Tagging User Research Data: How to Support the Synthesis of Information in Design Teams. In: Plattner, H., Meinel, C., Leifer, L. (eds) Design Thinking Research. Understanding Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06823-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation