A Philosophical Approach about User Experience Methodology

  • Marcos N. Beccari
  • Tiago L. Oliveira
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6769)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to identify some of the possible contributions of the entitled Philosophy of Design to the processes involved in the User Experience methods. After a brief introduction on User Experience principles and methods, we will make a brief overview of the history of research in Design. Moving on we shall review some of the main precepts of Philosophy of Design and, finally, make evident the scientistic and pragmatic predominance of the User Experience methods.

Keywords

User Experience Methodology Philosophy of Design Post-Positivism Terence Love 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baljon, C.J.: History of history and canons of design. Design Studies 23, 333–343 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bamford, G.: From analysis/synthesis to conjecture/analysis: a review of Karl Popper’s influence on design methodology in architecture. Design Studies 23, 245–261 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bestelius, I., Doevendans, K.: Planning, design and the post-modernity of cities. Design Studies 23, 233–244 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bevan, N.: What is the difference between the purpose of usability and user experience methods? In: Proceedings of the Workshop UXEM 2009 (INTERACT 2009). ACM Press, Uppsala (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broadbent, G.: Design and Theory Building. In: Cross, N. (ed.) Developments in Design Methodology. John Wiley, UK (1984)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bucciarelli, L.L.: Between thought and object in engineering design. Design Studies 23, 219–231 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Calvera, A.: Treinando pesquisadores para o Design: algumas considerações e muitas preocupações acadêmicas. In: Design em Foco, vol. III(001), pp. 97-120. EDUNEB, janeira-junho, Salvador (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coyne, R.D.: Objectivity and the design process environment and planning. Planning and Design 19, 361–371 (1990)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coyne, R.D., Snodgrass, A.: Is designing mysterious? Challenging the dual knowledge thesis. Design Studies 12(3), 124–131 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coyne, R., Park, H., Wiszniewski, D.: Design devices: digital drawing and the pursuit of difference. Design Studies 23, 263–286 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cross, N. (ed.): Developments in Design Methodology. John Wiley, UK (1984)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cross, N.: Science and design methodology: a review. Research in Engineering Design 5, 63–69 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cross, N.: Editorial: Forty years of design research. Design Studies 28, 1–4 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daley, J.: Design creativity and the understanding of objects. Design Studies 3(3), 133–137 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dilnot, C.: Design as a socially significant activity: an introduction. Design Studies 3(3), 139–146 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dixon, J.R.: On a research methodology towards a scientific theory of design. In: Newsome, S.L., Spillers, W.R., Finger, S. (eds.) Design Theory 1988, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1988)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eder, W.E.: Report on workshop W3. In: Hubka, V., Eder, W.E. (eds.) Schriftenreihe WDK 7 Results of ICED 1981, Rome, Heurista, Zurich (1981)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fontoura, A. M.: As manifestações pós-modernistas no desenho industrial e suas repercussões no ensino do projeto de produto. Dissertação de Mestrado em Educação – Pedagogia Universitária. PUC-PR, Curitiba ( June 1997)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Galle, P.: Design as intentional action: a conceptual analysis. Design Studies 20(1), 57–82 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Houkes, W., Vermaas, P.E., Dorst, K., De Vries, M.J.: Design and use as plans: an action-theoretical account. Design Studies, 23, 303–320 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kroes, P.: Design methodology and the nature of technical artefacts. Design Studies 23, 287–302 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Law, E., Roto, V., Hassenzahl, M., Vermeeren, A., Kort, J.: Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Computing Systems 2009. ACM Press, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liddament, T.: The computationalist paradigm in design research. Design Studies 20(1), 41–56 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Love, T.: Environmental and Ethical Factors in Engineering Design Theory: a Post positivist Approach. Praxis Education, Perth, Western Australia (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Love, T.: Philosophy of Design: A Meta-theoretical Structure for Design Theory. Design Studies 21, 293–313 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Love, T.: Educating those involved in changing human futures: a more coherent programme for design education. In: Swann, C., Young, E. (eds.) Re-inventing Design Eucation in the University. School of Design, pp. 242–248. Curtin University of Technology, Perth (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Love, T.: Constructing a coherent cross-disciplinary body of theory about designing and designs: some philosophical issues. Design Studies, 23, 345–361 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Margolin, V.: Design history or design studies: subject matter and methods. Design Studies 13(2), 104–116 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Oxman, R.: Educating the designerly thinker. Design Studies 20(2), 105–122 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Phillips, D.C., Burbules, N.C.: Postpositivism and Educational Research. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham & Boulder (2000)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sargent, P.: Design science or nonscience. Design Studies 15(4), 389–402 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    SchöN, D.: Towards a marriage of artistry and applied science in the architectural design studio. JAE 41(4), 4–10 (1988)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Thomas, J.C., Carroll, J.M.: The psychological study of design. Design Studies 1(1), 5–11 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Trott, E.: Permanence, change and standards of excellence in design. Design Studies 23, 321–331 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zammito, J.H.: A Nice Derangement of Epistemes. Post-positivism in the study of Science from Quine to Latour. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcos N. Beccari
    • 1
  • Tiago L. Oliveira
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de DesignUniversidade Federal do ParanáCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations