Ben is a Director at Symplicit in Brisbane and acknowledges the traditional custodians.
Ben wants to look back at our roots and see how we got here as design researchers.
A client asked "Why do you do it this way?"
Maybe you've moved from post it notes to full transcripts.
When you do that it's still the same process.
A client asked "Why do you do it this way?"
Maybe you've moved from post it notes to full transcripts.
When you do that it's still the same process.
So where do these things come from?
Bearded philosophers, hospital bed, AI photocopies and 3500 years of argument about what meaning is.
Bearded philosophers, hospital bed, AI photocopies and 3500 years of argument about what meaning is.
What does it mean to look back?
Ben found a book from the 1980's called contextual design — designing systems that reflect the way customers want to do their work.
In the 1970's Terry Winograd wrote AI language processors better than Siri.
Ben found a book from the 1980's called contextual design — designing systems that reflect the way customers want to do their work.
In the 1970's Terry Winograd wrote AI language processors better than Siri.
Fernando Flores was the finance minister in Chile forced out by the Pinochet regime and together with Terry wrote the book below.
They also weren't far off creating fully automated space communism.
They also weren't far off creating fully automated space communism.
They posited computers were a way for people to access information about the world and we needed to help people access them easier back in 1986.
In the 1980's Xerox had so much money in the 80's they owned two research campuses.
People were complaining copiers were too complicated.
So Xerox made a smarter copier with more smarts inside.
They remained hard to use.
People were complaining copiers were too complicated.
So Xerox made a smarter copier with more smarts inside.
They remained hard to use.
Xerox hired an Anthropologist, Lucy Suchman, who wanted to know the disconnect between the marketing about how easy the copiers were to use, and the reality of genius computer scientists not being able to use the copiers they created
She used conversation analysis of the user at the photocopier and what she found was that what the copier was thinking was happening and what the user thinks is going on got further our of alignment until someone discovers there's a problem.
This is the mid to late 80s and the first wave of expert or AI based systems.
The book Lucy wrote was a critique of the beliefs that you could predict the needs of the user and present them to the user.
The book Lucy wrote was a critique of the beliefs that you could predict the needs of the user and present them to the user.
The next part is how do we think about thinking?
The way we study about thinking is we out them in a decontextualised room and ask them about their thinking.
We learned a lot, but there's another way of thinking about thinking.
The way we study about thinking is we out them in a decontextualised room and ask them about their thinking.
We learned a lot, but there's another way of thinking about thinking.
Thinking happens all around us and we cannot disconnect it from cultural, social and situational contexts.
Edwin Hutchins wanted people see culture as much as thinking at the same time in his book cognition in the wild.
Edwin Hutchins wanted people see culture as much as thinking at the same time in his book cognition in the wild.
What are people doing in their head
How are they communicating that thinking
How does someone intake that thinking
What do they do in their head once they're making sense of it.
How are they communicating that thinking
How does someone intake that thinking
What do they do in their head once they're making sense of it.
These three books were all putting forward the ideas in the 80s.
The way we do design research today is inseperable from the way we were thinking about AI in the 80s and early 90s
The way we do design research today is inseperable from the way we were thinking about AI in the 80s and early 90s
When Glaser & Strauss defined Grounded Theory they were critiquing the theory at the time 'everyhting that could be said about death has been said'
In 1965 the wrote this book called 'awareness of dying' after spending time in hospitals, waiting rooms, nurses stations.
In 1965 the wrote this book called 'awareness of dying' after spending time in hospitals, waiting rooms, nurses stations.
The culture at the time was to keep patients on the dark about their own imminent death. Friends and family were not allowed to tell patients they were dying.
Glaser & Strauss would be provocative to nurses and doctors to try and get the staff to admit someone was dying.
Glaser & Strauss would be provocative to nurses and doctors to try and get the staff to admit someone was dying.
They found eventually there was a tipping point that everyone came out and told patients they were terminal.
To get to that point Glaser and Strauss had to do this rigorous qualitative research and invented grounded theory so they could challenge the current thinking around dying.
They were meticulous about documenting their process so it could be interrogated.
They were meticulous about documenting their process so it could be interrogated.
At the time there was a resurgence of quantitative work and they were arguing against this move away from qualitative methods.
So what was the process for grounded theory?
In the 60s this was radical.
Most qualitative research started by testing a theory based on someone else's thoughts.
Most qualitative research started by testing a theory based on someone else's thoughts.
So why does it work??????
Grounded theory makes some very specific assumptions:
There are patterns you can look at and understand
The people you are looking at know what they're doing and can explain it to you
As your understanding grows it changes as more understanding be ones available.
There are patterns you can look at and understand
The people you are looking at know what they're doing and can explain it to you
As your understanding grows it changes as more understanding be ones available.
Grounded theory is a form of reasoning
It is known as Inductive Reasoning.
It is known as Inductive Reasoning.
When we think about things we have:
Elements
Pattern of relationship
Observed phemomenon
Elements
Pattern of relationship
Observed phemomenon
In an inductive approach we:
Observe a phenomenon
Identify the elements
Then see patterns of relationships
When we look for saturation it means observing phenomenon enough times to know it's a pattern.
Observe a phenomenon
Identify the elements
Then see patterns of relationships
When we look for saturation it means observing phenomenon enough times to know it's a pattern.
Deductive reasoning goes:
Elements
Pattern
Phenomenon
It's much less ambiguous which is why a lot of people prefer it. It's what Quantitative research is based on.
Elements
Pattern
Phenomenon
It's much less ambiguous which is why a lot of people prefer it. It's what Quantitative research is based on.
Most of the time most researchers are doing a mixed version of grounded theory.
Abductive reasoning
We have patterns of relationship
Observed phenomenon
And you go find the elements.
It's a really creative way to think about your research.
We have patterns of relationship
Observed phenomenon
And you go find the elements.
It's a really creative way to think about your research.
A philosopher in the 1900s Pierce(*?) Put forward that inductive and deductive reasoning can only be used to magnify the exisiting understanding and it can not be used to learn something you don't already know.
You cannot find new elements.
You cannot find new elements.
A great example is how people use technology.
If we only look at young and old we can never see commonalities outside of those categories.
If we were instead to look at how does sight impact ease of use, we have a new creative understanding you can explore in a variety of ways
If we only look at young and old we can never see commonalities outside of those categories.
If we were instead to look at how does sight impact ease of use, we have a new creative understanding you can explore in a variety of ways
Design abduction
If you look at elements and patterns at the same time you can discover much more in your research.
If you look at elements and patterns at the same time you can discover much more in your research.
The more theory you've read, the more ways you can think about the world, the more ways you can think about the world the more ways you can create meaning.
Chapter 2 of Practical Ethnography is recommended.
Chapter 2 of Practical Ethnography is recommended.
The position we occupy in the world impacts how we view the world.
We use this position to explain the world to us.
You cannot help but view the world through gendered and racialised lenses.
You need to be able to describe your current view to extend them in new ways.
We use this position to explain the world to us.
You cannot help but view the world through gendered and racialised lenses.
You need to be able to describe your current view to extend them in new ways.
Another way to get better at abductive reasoning is to share your views with other researchers, designers and other people.
Design research is a craft, a skilled activity you can only get better at by doing it.
You need to embed yourself in a community of practitioners
Design research is a craft, a skilled activity you can only get better at by doing it.
You need to embed yourself in a community of practitioners
The way that people know things is different for the way we assume we know things.
Finding out that gap is deep in our practice.
The fact that your thinking is outside of your head makes it more impactful.
You can see what's going on through grounded theory
Finding out that gap is deep in our practice.
The fact that your thinking is outside of your head makes it more impactful.
You can see what's going on through grounded theory
We can find new arguments about what we're doing now by looking back at where our methods came from.
We will understand where we can go.
We will understand where we can go.
Q: Book recommendations
A: Picking up - about garbage truck drivers, Howard Becker is someone I recommend.
A: Picking up - about garbage truck drivers, Howard Becker is someone I recommend.
Q: Does reading widely mean from lots of different industries?
A: Absolutely, you're trying to find different ways about how you think. If you don't like non-fiction pick up fiction.
A: Absolutely, you're trying to find different ways about how you think. If you don't like non-fiction pick up fiction.
Q:You said people are more comfortable with quantitative research can you explain?
A: quant has a longer history, we spend a lot of school learning math and having it embedded in the way we think about situation.
A: quant has a longer history, we spend a lot of school learning math and having it embedded in the way we think about situation.
The complexity and multifactorial qualitative insights present a harder insight to use in a management, time poor, ambiguous way.
If your analysis is open for review you can get that trust from people by taking them through the process.
If your analysis is open for review you can get that trust from people by taking them through the process.
People assume that the numerical methods are more inspectable than the qualitative methods, which is what Galsser and Straus tried to address with grounded theory.
The two hardest problems in computer science is people, convincing computer scientists that people are the hardest problems, and off by one errors.
Q: How do you get stakeholders across your synthesis space
A: Give them context when they walk in the room 'This may seem like kindergarten and nonsense but let me take you through it'
If they're more skeptical focus on a more granular part of the process.
A: Give them context when they walk in the room 'This may seem like kindergarten and nonsense but let me take you through it'
If they're more skeptical focus on a more granular part of the process.
Then the next thing to do after giving them more depth in themes, get them to pick up a post it note and move it around, then they become part of the body of analysis and part of the process
Bringing people into that space,sharing the analysis is how to bring people in.
Bringing people into that space,sharing the analysis is how to bring people in.
Q: what is the easiest way into reasoning
A: the simplest is the elements (what's)
A: the simplest is the elements (what's)
@threadreaderapp unroll please!
