Advertisement

Co-design: An Investigation Through Interviewing Expert in Europe

  • Shu Yuan
  • Hua DongEmail author
  • Zi Chen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9180)

Abstract

This paper summarized the study of the co-design expert interviews in Europe. Seven interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed and then analyzed with the general inductive approach. Twelve categories were divided into the upper level of the principles about co-design and the lower level of the practical experiences and techniques. At last, the authors extracted the most impressive perceptions from the twelve categories based on the Chinese co-design experiences.

Keywords

Co-design Participatory design Expert interviews 

References

  1. 1.
    Sanders, E.B.-N.: Generative tools for co-designing. In: Scrivener, S.A.R., Ball, L.J., Woodcock, A. (eds.) Collaborative Design: Proceedings of CoDesigning, pp. 3–12. Springer, London (2000). Accessed from http://www.maketools.com/articles-papers/GenerativeToolsforCoDesig-ing_Sanders_00.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mattelmäki, T.: Design probes. Doctoral thesis. University of Art and Design, Helsinki, Finland (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sleeswijk Visser, F., Stappers, P.J., Van der Lugt, R., Sanders, E.B.-N.: Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDes. Int. J. CoCreation Des. Arts 1(2), 1–30 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brandt, E.: Designing exploratory design games: a framework for participation in participatory design. In: Proceedings of the 9th Participatory Design Conference, pp. 57–66. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thomas, D.R.: A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am. J. Eval. 27(2), 237–246 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mattelmäki, T., Sleeswijk Visser, F.: Lost in Co-X: Interpretations of Co-design and Co-creationGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sanders, E.B.-N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDes. Int. J. CoCreation Des. Arts 4(1), 5–18 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaver, B., Duune, T., Pacenti, E.: Cultural probes. Interactions 6(1), 21–29 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kouprie, M., Sleeswijk Visser, F.: A framework for empathy in design: stepping into and out of the user’s life. J. Eng. Des. 20(5), 437–448 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yuan, S., Dong, H.: Empathy building through co-design. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (eds.) UAHCI 2014, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8513, pp. 85–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yuan, S., Dong, H.: Co-design in China: implications for users, designers and researchers. In: Langdon, P.M., et al. (eds.) Inclusive Designing, pp. 235–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee, J.J.: Against method: the portability of method in human-centered design. Doctoral thesis. Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Helsinki, Finland (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tongji UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Department of Tuberculosis PreventionWuhan Pulmonary HospitalWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations