skip to main content
10.1145/3328020.3353947acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Communicating design-related intellectual influence: towards visual references

Published:04 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Prototype-driven design research often involves collecting and analyzing designed artifacts in annotated portfolios and design workbooks. These collections constitute important sources of intellectual influence for researchers, yet communicating this influence presents unique challenges, such as the difficulty of translating the aesthetic, material, or interactive qualities of a designed artifact into written text. Building on discourses of visual thinking and visual imagery in science communication and HCI research, this paper introduces, and elaborates, a novel research communication design concept called "visual references," which combine bibliographic information with photographic images, textual annotations, and diagrammatic annotations in order to communicate design-related intellectual influence.

References

  1. [n.d] Zotero | Your personal research assistant. http://www.zotero.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Daren Arsenault, Laurence D. Smith, and Edith A. Beauchamp. 2006. Visual inscriptions in the scientific hierarchy. Science Communication 27, 3 (2006), 376--428.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Eli Blevis. 2011. Digital imagery as meaning and form in HCI and design. interactions 18, 5 (sep 2011), 60. http://doi.org/10/1145/2008176.2008190Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Eli Blevis. 2014. Stillness and motion, meaning and form. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Eli Blevis, Elizabeth Churchill, William Odom, James Pierce, David Roedl, and Ron Wakkary. 2012. Visual thinking and digital imagery. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts - CHI EA '12. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2715--2718. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Eli Blevis, Sabrina Hauser, and William Odom. 2015. Sharing the hidden treasure in pictorials. interactions 22, 3 (Apr. 2015) 32--43. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. John Bowers. 2012. The logic of annotated portfolios. In Proceedings of the 2012 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '12. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 68--77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Hans-Jurgen Bucher and Philipp Niemann. 2012. Visualizing science: The reception of powerpoint presentations. Visual Communication 11, 3(2012), 283--306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Audrey Desjardins, Ron Wakkary, and William Odom. 2016. Behind the lens. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '16. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 360--376. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Tom Djajadiningrat, Stephan Wensveen, Joep Frens, and Kees Overbeeke. 2004. Tangible products: Redressing the balance between appearance and action. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 8, 5 (Sept 2004), 294--309. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. YJ Doran. 2019. Building knowledge through images in physics. Visual Communication 18, 2(2019), 251--277. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Elsevier. 2019. Graphical abstracts. https://www.elsevier.com/authors/journal-authors/graphical-abstractGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fabiola Cristina Rodriguez Estrada and Lloyd Spencer Davis. 2015. Improving visual communication of science through the incorporation of graphic design theories and practice into science communication. Science Communication 37, 1 (2015), 140--148. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Daniel Fallman. 2003. Design-oriented human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '03. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 225--232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. William Gaver. 2011. Making spaces: How design workbooks work. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '11. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1551--1560. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ronald N. Giere. 1999. Visual models and scientific judgment. In Science without laws. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago, IL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Lars-Erik Janlert and Erik Stolterman. 2018. Things that keep us busy: The elements of interaction, The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Ilpo Koskinen, John Zimmerman, Thomas Binder, Johan Redström, and Stephan Wensveen (1st ed.). 2011. Design research through practice: From the lab, field, and showroom. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA. 5--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Bruno Latour. 1990. Drawing things together. In Representation in Scientific Practice, Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar (Eds.). The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA. 19--68Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Louise Ravelli, Brian Paltridge, Sue Starfield, and Kathryn Tuckwell. 2013. Extending the notion of text: The visual and performing arts doctoral thesis. Visual Communication 12, 4 (2013), 395--422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Mark Roxburgh. 2010. Design and the aesthetics of research. Visual Communication 9, 4 (2010), 425--439. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Jean Trumbo. 1999. Visual literacy and science communication. Science Communication 20, 4 (1999), 409--425. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Jean Trumbo. 2000. Seeing science: Research opportunities in the visual communication of science. Science Communication 21, 4 (2000), 379--391. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Anthony F.C. Wallace. 1978. Rockdale: The growth of an American village in the early industrial revolution. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Mikael Wiberg and Erik Stolterman. 2014. What makes a prototype novel?: A knowledge contribution concern for interaction design research. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (NordiCHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 531--540. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Shelley Evenson. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '07. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. John Zimmerman, Erik Stolterman, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2010. An analysis and critique of research through design. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 310--319. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Communicating design-related intellectual influence: towards visual references

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      SIGDOC '19: Proceedings of the 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication
      October 2019
      308 pages
      ISBN:9781450367905
      DOI:10.1145/3328020

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 October 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGDOC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate85of105submissions,81%Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader