Abstract
This chapter engages with the idea that instead of trying to satisfy the users’ elusive particularities, designers should offer them tools to create their own designs. From the 1970s speculations on computational techniques for user participation in design, to current design for design empowerment endeavors, technological renderings of this idea do not escape controversy around the delivery of their empowering claims. The question remains: Who designs? The “empowered” users? The tools and/or techniques that facilitate the process? The designer of the tools and/or techniques? I propose that technological mediation, construed here as the mode of agency distribution among users, technologies, and their designers, provides a productive viewpoint from which to analyze and critique techno-centric proposals of design for user empowerment. With this hypothesis as point of departure, I offer a parallel reading of proposals for technologically mediated user participation in design, presented in the 1971 “Design Participation” conference of the Design Research Society, and recent theorizations of technological mediation in science and technology studies (STS) and the philosophy of technology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The term “open source” originated from the field of software development. It denotes software where the source code is made freely available to the public domain for use, modification, and redistribution. The Open Source Definition, developed by the Open Source Initiative, a California based public domain corporation, identifies a set of distribution terms that must be met in order for a piece of software to qualify as “open source.” Over the past few years, open source ideas and practices have been translated to the domains of knowledge (e.g. Open Knowledge) and artifacts (e.g. Open Source Hardware, Open Design).
- 2.
As defined by Joseph Pine , mass customization is marketing and manufacturing technique for offering customized products and services to individual customers at near mass production efficiency (Pine 1993).
- 3.
For reasons of simplicity I henceforth use “design for empowerment” instead of “design for design empowerment.” In the context of this chapter design for empowerment refers to empowering users in design decision-making and giving them the tools to create their own designs.
- 4.
The concept of “technological mediation” was systematized by philosopher of technology Verbeek (2011). Verbeek synthesized earlier approaches from STS and the philosophy of technology that grappled with the reciprocities and cross-configurations among users, technologies, and their designers. Bruno Latour had earlier conceptualized such relations in terms of “technical mediation” (Latour 1994).
- 5.
The “Design Participation” conference presentations discussed in this chapter are “Adaptive-Conditional Architecture” by Charles Eastman , associate professor at the School of Urban and Public Affairs, at the Carnegie-Mellon University, “Information Processes for Participatory Design” by Hungarian-born French architect Yona Friedman , and “Aspects of Living in an Architecture Machine” by Nicholas Negroponte , assistant professor in the School of Architecture and Planning, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- 6.
Oudshoorn and Pinch’s review includes literature from innovation studies, the sociology of technology, feminist studies of technology, semiotic approaches, and media and cultural studies approaches (Oudshoorn and Pinch 2008). Through this review the authors collect analytical tools that capture the previously neglected role of the users in the shaping of technologies.
- 7.
The principle of symmetry was one of the main tenets of SCOT (Pinch and Bijker 1984). According to this principle the analyst maintains an impartial, agnostic position as to any “true” properties of a technological artifact in the explanations of its development (Brey 1997). The positions of all “relevant social groups” should therefore be handled by using the same explanatory criteria. First articulated by David Bloor in the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge (SSK), this principle initially referred to the use of the same type of sociological explanation for “successful” and “unsuccessful” scientific theories (Bloor 1976). The application of symmetry in SCOT has been criticized for implicitly assuming the equality and presence of all relevant social groups in the design process, thus neglecting power asymmetries between groups (Klein and Kleinman 2002).
- 8.
Don Ihde developed a post-phenomenological approach as a corrective to phenomenology, construed as “the study of structures of consciousness as experienced from the first-person point of view” (Smith 2012). For Ihde all human experience is mediated by technologies, which constitute an inextricable part of the life-world (Verbeek 2011). Post-phenomenology therefore moves away from traditional anthropocentric accounts to a classification of technologically mediated experiences. These mediations, reminds Verbeek, constitute both subjects and objects (Verbeek 2011), or rather structure their co-constitution.
- 9.
In his book Technics and Praxis: A Philosophy of Technology Don Ihde proposed to think about “hermeneutic” mediations in terms of “amplification” and “reduction” and of “pragmatic mediations” in terms of “invitation” and “inhibition” (Ihde 1979).
- 10.
In his 2009 article entitled “The Textility of Making” social anthropologist Tim Ingold criticizes the effort to remedy the asymmetries between subjects and objects by attributing agency to non-human actors. Ingold argues that this approach casts subjects and objects before any action has taken place, and therefore loses sight of the flows of forces and matter that happen in-the-action. Ingold calls for the replacement of relational descriptions of subjects and objects in networks of agency with dynamic, processual, action-based descriptions.
- 11.
Verbeek’s second method for bridging the “context of design” with the “context of use” is a form of Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA). CTA brings all stakeholders in an evolutionary design process. This process resembles a deliberate actualization of the evolutionary technological development under the influence of relevant user groups that Pinch and Bijker had theorized in SCOT (1984). Verbeek proposes an augmentation of the CTA process through an explicit exposition of stakeholder-technology associations (Verbeek 2011).
- 12.
In Verbeek’s proposal constructive technology assessment takes the form of what one could call a “moral usability trial.” Verbeek here appears to ignore the moral implications of cross-configurations at play between designers, users, artifacts and institutions (Woolgar 1991; Mackay et al. 2000) during such trials. In the case of scenarios and simulations he does not take into account the discontents associated with such mediated representations of a reality in the making (Turkle 2009).
- 13.
One of the first and formative events for design methods was “The Conference on Systematic and Intuitive Methods in Engineering, Industrial Design, Architecture and Communications” (Jones and Thornley 1963), at the Imperial College London.
- 14.
An indicative example of future-centric rhetoric in design is the work of American architect, designer, author, and inventor Buckminster Fuller . Fuller was amongst the first to pose issues of sustainability and human survival as integral aspects of design and to articulate principles for what he called “comprehensive anticipatory design science:” a systematic articulation of human-made interventions in the environment. His paraphrase of Abraham Lincoln in the famous motto “the best way to predict the future is to design it,” is revealing of a future-oriented attitude with growing prevalence among designers during the 1960s and 1970s.
- 15.
The ideas of “undesired consequences” or “harmful side effects of technology” invoked by Nigel Cross at the “Design Participation” conference, bring to mind the concept of “unintended consequences” popularized by sociologist Robert Merton . In his 1936 article entitled “The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action,” Merton engaged in a systematic analysis of the possible causes for unintended consequences, ranging from human error and ignorance to the values that guide decision-making. The idea of intended and unintended consequences was also central in the work of philosopher, sociologist, and political economist Max Weber . In theorizing “risk society” Ulrich Beck argued that the traditional category of unintended consequences does not capture the complexities of risk society: when it comes to risk, intentionality doesn’t really matter. If traditional industrial modernity tried to master nature and render the unpredictable predictable (determinant judgment), Beck’s new modernity is conscious of the new uncertainties that are manufactured in this process (reflexive judgment). These manufactured uncertainties, the consciousness that technologies will bring risks that cannot be predicted, challenge the role of the experts and pose questions of decision making legitimacy, similar to the ones operative in the “Design Participation” conference.
- 16.
The Atoms of Environmental Structure had been developed during Alexander ’s two-year visiting researcher appointment at the Offices Development Group (ODG) of the UK Ministry of Public and Building Works.
- 17.
Charles Eastman is currently director of the Digital Building Laboratory at Georgia Tech and renowned for his pioneering work in Building Information Modeling. At the time of the “Design Participation” conference Eastman was associate professor and director of Institute of Physical Planning at the School of Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie-Mellon University.
- 18.
As part of the qualitative and quantitative toolkit for measuring “fit” between users and their environment Eastman listed methods such as human factors, ergonomic studies, time and motion analysis, proxemics influences and social interactions, as well as influences from sensory processing, cognition, and symbolic references (Eastman 1972).
- 19.
The feeling that designers imposed order in the world through the environments that they designed, was widely shared among designers since the rise and decline of International Modernism. The modernist redefinition of architecture as making “machines for living” (Le Corbusier 1923) did not only epitomize the turn toward functionality and efficiency but also formed the ground for a broader rethinking of “architecture as technology.” Technology means here as “anything made, managed, configured, or transformed in the process of modifying the environment for human habitation” (Hale 2012).
- 20.
In the context of Warren Brodey’s article, “self-organizing” denotes a system that maintains its organization besides partial failures and “evolutionary” designates a system that can form new “purposes.”
- 21.
Yona Friedman had originally used Pour Une Architecture Scientifique as a textbook for a class on participatory design, which he taught as a visiting professor in the University of Ann Arbor at Michigan (Vardouli 2012). During his travels to the United States, the Hungarian-born French architect, had developed an intense curiosity for the epistemological transformations that information theoretical ideas effected to numerous disciplines. During his stay at Ann Arbor and under the influence of the renowned graph theorist Frank Harary (Vardouli 2012), he applied information and graph theory to justify the intuitions that had led him to propose the “Spatial City,” and to elucidate his ideas in a comprehensive scientific theory of architecture (Friedman 1971).
- 22.
With slogans such as a “new humanism through machines” the Group’s leader, Nicholas Negroponte, actively promoted a shift to the understanding of computers from tools of the technocracy to media of personal empowerment and social emancipation (Negroponte 1970; Groisser and Negroponte 1971; Negroponte 1975).
- 23.
The Architecture Machine Group’s first major work in the area of Computer Aided Design (CAD) was URBAN 5, a research project for computer-aided architecture initiated in 1966 under the joint sponsorship of the IBM Cambridge Scientific Center and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The Architecture Machine Group later wrote about URBAN 5: “This effort was the first and largest comprehensive computer system ever developed to assist architects with those activities they call “design” (as against specification writing, preparation of working drawings, accounting etc.)” (Groisser and Negroponte 1971).
- 24.
Around the time of the Design Participation conference, the Architecture Machine Group submitted to the National Science Foundation (NSF) a proposal for Computer Aids to Participatory Architecture, which however did not get funded. Nicholas Negroponte had taken inspiration from Friedman’s argument that the user—as the risk bearer in design- is the legitimate decision maker (Friedman 1975). In 1973, Negroponte invited Yona Friedman as a visiting researcher in the Architecture Machine Group, in an effort to implement his ideas about the FLATWRITER, in a new program called YONA (Your Own Native Architect). In 1975 Nicholas Negroponte published the results of these explorations in his book Soft Architecture Machines, with a foreword on the chapter about participatory design by Yona Friedman.
- 25.
Gordon Pask famously argued mutual understanding derived from three levels of modeling: “(1) its (the machine’s) model of you, (2) its model of your model of it, and (3) its model of your model of its model of you.” (Negroponte 1975).
- 26.
In his presentation “Aspects of Living in an Architecture Machine,” presented at the “Design Participation” conference, Negroponte explored different methods for recognizing, responding, and learning from the user. As far as user recognition was concerned Negroponte proposed heuristics, i.e. informed guesses based on previous experience and mental shortcuts as an intuitive way of identifying the user of an environment. He counterpoised this idea to artificial means, such as a barcode, or statistics, that do not really provide any meaningful information about the user. He then proceeded to envision three kinds of responsiveness, pertaining to atmospheric changes (environmental), practical gadgetry (operational), and linguistic interactions with the user (informational). Finally, when it came to learning the user, Negroponte examine three types of models: the “determinate”, the “probabilistic”, and the “evolutionary.” The determinate model corresponded to a compositional kind of modeling, based on building up a model through smaller ones. “Such a model,” Negroponte wrote, “is always at the mercy of its human designers, because when it fails it is simply repaired by the addition or subtraction of the parameters deemed necessary.” (Negroponte 1972) The probabilistic model was based on the examination of statistical probability, gauging future behavior based on past ones. Negroponte dismissed this anticipatory kind of learning as unsatisfactory, because it told the machine nothing about the phenomenon in question. Negroponte proposed evolutionary learning as the main principle of an “intelligent” environment.
- 27.
Deontology is a normative theory of ethics that evaluates an action based on a set of rules (Alexander and Moore 2012). Preference utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, a normative theory that judges the rightness or wrongness of conduct based on the consequences of one’s actions. This form of utilitarianism seeks to satisfy the preferences of as many stakeholders as possible (Sinnott-Armstrong 2012).
References
Achterhuis H (1998) De moralisering van de apparaten. Socialisme en Democratie 52:3–12
Achterhuis H (2001) American philosophy of technology: the empirical turn. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Akrich M (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker W, Law J (eds) Shaping technology/building society. MIT Press, Cambridge
Alexander C (1964) Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Alexander C (1965) The question of computers in design. Landscape 14:6–8
Alexander C (1967) The atoms of environmental structure. In: Moore G (ed) Emerging methods in environmental design and planning. MIT Press, Cambridge (Republished in 1970)
Alexander L, Moore M (2012) Deontological ethics. The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. In: Zalta E (ed) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/ethics-deontological/. Accessed 3 June 2014
Anderson C (2012) Makers: the new industrial revolution. Crown Business, New York
Anwar A, Gulzar A, Anwar A (2011) Impact of self-designed products on customer satisfaction. Interdis J Contemp Res Bus 3:546–552
Armillas I (1972) Gaming-simulation: an approach to user participation in design. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the design research society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Arnstein S (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Plan Assoc 35:216–224
Banham R (1972) Alternative networks for the alternative culture? In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the design research society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Beck U (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. SAGE, London
Bloor D (1976) Knowledge and social imagery. Routledge & Kegan Paul, Londres
Bolt RA, Architecture Machine Group (1976) Computer mediated inter- and intra- personal communication. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Architecture, Architecture Machine Group, Cambridge
Brey P (1997) Social constructivism for philosophers of technology: a shopper’s guide. Tech J Soc Philos Technol 2:3–4, 56–78
Broadbent G, Ward A (1969) Design methods in architecture [symposium at Portsmouth School of architecture, 1967]. Lund Humphries, London
Brodey WM (1967) The design of intelligent environments: soft architecture. Landscape 17:8–12
Bruns A (2008) Blogs, wikipedia, second life, and beyond: from production to produsage. Peter Lang, New York
Busbea L (2007) Topologies: the urban utopia in France, 1960–1970. MIT Press, Cambridge
Carr NG (2008) The big switch: rewiring the world, from Edison to Google. W. W. Norton & Co., New York
Corbusier Le (1923) Vers une architecture. G. Cres, Paris
Cross N (1972a) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Cross N (1972b) Here comes everyman. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Cross N (1972c) Preface. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Daley J (1969) A philosophical critique of behaviourism in architectural design. In: Broadbent G, Ward A (eds) Design methods in architecture. Lund Humphries, London
Davidoff P (1965) Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 31:331–338
Eastman C (1972) Adaptive-conditional architecture. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Feenberg A (1991) Critical theory of technology. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Feo A (1972) Operational games applied to socio-technical problems. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Franke N, Schreier M (2010) Why customers value self-designed products: the importance of process effort and enjoyment. J Prod Innov Manage 27:1020–1031
Franke N, Schreier M, Kaiser U (2010) The “I designed it myself” effect in mass customization. Manage Sci 65:125–140
Friedman Y (1958) L’ Architecture mobile. L’ Auteur, Paris
Friedman Y (1971) Pour une architecture scientifique. Belfond, Paris
Friedman Y (1972) Information processes for participatory design. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Friedman Y (1975) Toward a scientific architecture. MIT Press, Cambridge; (1971) Pour une architecture scientifique. Belfond, Paris
Gregory SA (1966) The design method. Butterworth Press, London
Groisser LB, Negroponte NP (1971) Computer aids to participatory architecture. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
Hale J (2012) Architecture, technology and the body: from the prehuman to the posthuman. In: Crysler CG, Heynen H, Cairns S (eds) The SAGE handbook of architectural theory. SAGE, Los Angeles
Ihde D (1979) Technics and praxis. D. Reidel Publishing Co, Boston
Ihde D (1990) Technology and the lifeworld from garden to earth. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Ihde D (2009) Postphenomenology and technoscience. SUNY Press, Albany
Jones JC, Thornley D (1963) Conference on design methods: papers presented at the conference on systematic and intuitive methods in engineering, industrial design, architecture and communications. Pergamon Press, Oxford
Klein H, Kleinman DL (2002) The social construction of technology: structural considerations. Sci Technol Human Values 27:28–52
Kroes P, Meijers A (2000) The empirical turn in the philosophy of technology. JAI/Elsevier, Amsterdam
Latour B (1994) On technical mediation. Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge 3:29–64
Levin P (1972) Participation in planning decisions. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Licklider JCR (1960) Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Trans Hum Factors Electron 1:4–11
Light A, Roberts D (2000) Toward new foundations in philosophy of technology: Mitcham and Wittgenstein on descriptions. Res Philos Technol 19:125–147
Mackay H, Carne C, Beynon-Davies P et al (2000) Reconfiguring the user: using rapid application development. Soc Stud Sci 30:737–757
Mackenzie D, Wajcman J (1985) The social shaping of technology. Open University Press, Milton Keynes
Maver T (1972) Simulation and solution teams in architectural design. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Merton RK (1936) The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. Am Sociol Rev 1:894–904
Merton RK (1946) A note on science and democracy. J Legal Political Sociol 1:115–126
Mitchell W (1972) Experiments with participation-oriented computer systems. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Negroponte N (1970) The architecture machine: toward a more human environment. MIT Press, Cambridge
Negroponte N (1972) Aspects of living in an architecture machine. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Negroponte N (1975) Computer-aided participatory design. Soft architecture machines. MIT Press, Cambridge
Negroponte N (1976) Soft architecture machines. MIT Press, Cambridge
Nuttall J (1972) How to use technology. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (2005) How users matter: the co-construction of users and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (2008) User-technology relationships: some recent developments. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M et al (eds) The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd edn. MIT Press, London
Pickering A (1995) The mangle of practice: time, agency, and science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Pinch T, Bijker W (1984) The social construction of facts and artifacts: or, how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Soc Stud Sci 14:399–441
Pine BJ (1993) Mass customization: the new frontier in business competition. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Rosenblueth A, Wiener N, Bigelow J (1943) Behavior, purpose and teleology. Philos Sci 10:18–24
Rouillard D (2004) Superarchitecture: le futur de l’architecture 1950–1970. Editions de la Villette, Paris
Roy R (1972) Choosing the future. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Sabin D, Weigel R (1998) Product configuration frameworks: a survey. IEEE Intell Syst 13:42–49
Scacchi W (2003) When is Free/Open Source Software development faster, better, and cheaper than software engineering? Working Paper. Institute for Software Research
Selinger E (2006) Postphenomenology: a critical companion to Ihde. SUNY Press, Albany
Shirky C (2008) Here comes everybody: the power of organizing without organizations. Penguin Press, New York
Siddall JN (1972) Value theory as a vehicle for user participation in design. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Silverstone R, Hirsch E (1992) Consuming technologies: media and information in domestic spaces. Routledge, London/New York
Sinnott-Armstrong W (2012) Consequentialism. In: Zalta E (ed) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/consequentialism/. Accessed 3 June 2014
Smith DW (2012) Phenomenology. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy In: Zalta E. (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/phenomenology. Accessed 3 June, 2014
Stringer P (1972) A rationale for participation. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Studer RG (1969) The dynamics of behavior contingent physical systems. In: Broadbent G, Ward A (eds) Design methods in architecture [symposium at Portsmouth School of architecture, 1967]. Lund Humphries, London, pp 55–70
Sword H (2012) Zombie nouns. The New York Times Opinionator. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/zombie-nouns/. Accessed 3 June 2014
Talbot RJ (1972) Foreword. In: Cross N (ed) Design participation: proceedings of the Design Research Society’s conference. Academy Editions, London
Toffler A (1989) The third wave. William Morrow & Company, New York
Turkle S (2009) Simulation and its discontents. MIT Press, Cambridge
Upitis A (2008) Nature normative: the design methods movement, 1944–1967. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Vardouli T (2012) Design-for-empowerment-for-design : computational structures for design democratization. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
Vardouli T (2014) Sense and sensibility: the phenomenology vs behaviorism debate in the 1967 portsmouth symposium on design methods in architecture. ArchiDOCT 1:82–94
Vardouli T, Buechley L (2012) Open source architecture: an exploration of source code and access in architectural design. Leonardo 47:51–55
Veak TJ (2006) Democratizing technology: Andrew Feenberg’s critical theory of technology. SUNY Press, Albany
Verbeek P-P (2011) Moralizing technology: understanding and designing the morality of things. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
von Hippel E (1995) The sources of innovation. Oxford University Press, New York
von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge
von Hippel E, Katz R (2002) Shifting innovation to users via toolkits. Social Science Research Network, Rochester
Ward A (1969) Rightness and wrongness in the physical environment. In: Broadbent G, Ward A (eds) Design methods in architecture [symposium at Portsmouth School of architecture, 1967]. Lund Humphries, London, pp 166–178
Weinzapfel G, Negroponte N (1976) Architecture-by-yourself: an experiment with computer graphics for house design. Computer Graphics 10:74–78
Winner L (1986) Do artifacts have politics? The whale and the reactor: a search for limits in an age of high technology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Winner L (1993) Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Sci Technol Human Values 18:362–378
Woolgar S (1991) Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. In: Law J (ed) A sociology of monsters: essays on power, technology and domination. Routledge, London
Wyatt S (2003) Non-Users also matter: The construction of users and non-Users of the Internet. In: Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (eds) How users matter: the co-construction of users and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Wyatt S (2008) Technological determinism is dead; long live technological determinism. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M et al (eds) The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd edn. MIT Press, London
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Terry Knight , Professor of Design and Computation at the MIT Department of Architecture, Natasha Dow Schüll , Associate Professor at the MIT Program in Science, Technology, and Society, and Rodanthi Vardouli , graduate student at the MIT Department of Architecture, for their feedback and intellectual support in developing this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vardouli, T. (2015). Who Designs?. In: Bihanic, D. (eds) Empowering Users through Design. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13018-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13018-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13017-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13018-7
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)