Advertisement

A Systematic Review on International Design Research, in Order to Ensure that the Findings Can Compare Design Capabilities in the Portuguese Reality

  • Maria João FélixEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Design and Innovation book series (SSDI, volume 1)

Abstract

This chapter will present a first phase of a contextual study, which will initially focus on a systematic study of internationally produced thinking about the most pertinent contours, challenges, methods and results of design research. This study will make it possible to establish a reference framework, both for the collection and classification of data related to the Portuguese reality and for its subsequent analysis. Design research has a recognized trajectory, but the discourse built so far is not visible to the academic community. Researchers, creators, and theorists began documenting design when it was recognized as something that could be taught. Despite the isolated attempts of theoretical depth by some researchers, the degree of relevance between research and the different areas of design has been quite diverse, such as engineering, architecture and product design, still touching on territories such as arts and crafts. To summarize the available information on the evolution of research in the area of Design and the problematization that the international scientific community has generated around the establishment of its outlines and methods, namely on practice-based research, it will serve as a contribution to the clarification of aspects that are very relevant to a rapidly expanding area.

Keywords

Design research Practice-based research Relationship between science and design Design research methodology 

References

  1. Archer B (1981) A view of the nature of the design research. In: Jacques R, Powell JA (eds) Design: science: method. IPC Bussiness Press Ltd, Guilford, pp 30–47Google Scholar
  2. Bayazit N (2004) Investigating design: a review of forty years of design research. Design Issues 20:16–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burr J, Andreason M (1989) Design models in mechatronic product development. Des Stud 10(3):155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Costa R (2005) Investigação em/por design, Tese de Mestrado em Arte e Comunicação. Faculdade de Belas Artes da Universidade do Porto, PortoGoogle Scholar
  5. Costa R (2007) Estruturas Triangulares na Investigação em Design, Convergência na Dispersão. Obtido de http://ria.ua.pt/bitstream/10773/6066/1/MONO_RuiCosta.pdf
  6. Cross N (1982) Designerly ways of knowing. Design Stud 3(4):221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cross N (1993) A history of design methodology. In: de Vries MJ, Cross N, Grant DP (eds) Design methodology and relationships with science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp 15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cross N (1999) Design research: a disciplined conversation. Des Issues 15(2):5–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dorst K (1997) Describing design: a comparison of paradigms. Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Industrial Design Enginnering, Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Downing F (1992) Conversations in imagery. Des Stud 13(3):291–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Downton P (2003) Design research. RMIT University Press, Melbourne, Australia. ISBN: 0864592671Google Scholar
  12. Findeli A (1999) Introduction. Des Issues 15(2)Google Scholar
  13. Findeli A, Brouillet D, Martin S, Moineau C, Tarrago R (2008) Research through design and transdiciplinarity: a tentative contribution to the methodology of design research. In: Swiss design network symposium. Berne, Switzerland, pp 67–91Google Scholar
  14. Frankel L, Racine M (2010) The complex field of research: for design, through design, and about design. Obtained from www.designresearchsociety.org; http://www.designresearchsociety.org/docs-procs/DRS2010/PDF/043.pdf
  15. Frayling C (1993/1994). Research in art and design. Royal Coll Art Res Pap 1(1). ISBN 1874175551Google Scholar
  16. Friedman K (2000) Creating design knowledge: form research into practice. In: IDATER (International conference on design and technology educational research and curriculum development), Loughborough University, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedman K (2003) Theory construction in design research: criteria: approaches, and methods. Des Stud 24(6):507–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goldschmidt G (1995) The designer as a team of one. Des Stud 16(2):189–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Janlert J, Stolterman E (1997) The character of things. Des Stud 18(3):297–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jonas W (2004) Obtido de Forschung durch Design, Vortrag gehalten beider Tagung des swiss design network. Scweiz, Basel: http://8149.website.snafu.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2004_Basel.pdf
  21. Laurel B, Lunenfeld P (2003) design research: methods and perspectives, Mediaeworks Pamphets Series. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Margolin V (1998) Design studies: proposal for a new doctorate. In: Heller S (ed) The education of a graphic designer. Allworth Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Margolin V (2002) The politics of the artificial. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  24. Margolin V (2010) Design research: towards a history. Design Research Society, International Conference, Design & Complexity to be held, School of Industrial Design, Université de Montréal, Montréal (Quebec), Canada, p 80Google Scholar
  25. Picasso P (1985) Reprinted from The Arts, New York, May 1923. In: Goldwater R, Treves M (eds) Artists on art. John Murray, London, pp 416–417Google Scholar
  26. Polanyi M (1974) Personal knowledge. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  27. Purcell T, Gero J (1996) Design and other types of fixation experimental. Des Stud 17(4):363–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Roy R (1993) Case studies of creativity in innovative product development. Des Stud 14(4):423–443MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schneider B (2007) Design as practice, science and research. In: Michel R (ed) Design research now, essays and selected projects. Birkhäuser Verlag AG, Basel, pp 207–217Google Scholar
  30. Schön D (1983) The reflective practitioner. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Schön D (1988) Designing rules, types and worlds. Des Stud 9(3):181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Silva FM (2010) Investigar em design versus investigar pela prática do design– um novo desafio científico. Revista Ingepro, Inovação Gestão e Produção, pp 82–91Google Scholar
  33. Simon H (1969) The sciences of the artificial, 1st edn. MIT Press, Cambridge. ISBN 0262190516Google Scholar
  34. Simon H (1996) The sciences of the artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of DesignPolytechnic Institute of Cávado and AveBarcelosPortugal
  2. 2.CIAUDUniversity of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations