On the significance of making in interaction design research
Jonas Löwgren · interactions · 2016
a terize design as a distinct tradition in relation to the CHI community, Bill Gaver pointed out among many other useful observations that within design, "the practice of making is a route to discovery" [1].This instinctively rings true to me, and the paper from which the quote is taken may in fact be one of the reasons behind the growing recognition that making is important in interaction design research.However, it is less clear exactly how and why making is seen as important in interaction design research.One strategy, formerly quite dominant, is to blackbox making in favor of its outcome, the prototype, which could be tested empirically to yield the science of a traditional "design-The notion of making seems to be gaining some traction lately.When I talk to people outside academia about interaction design and new media, making often comes up, with references to physical computing, 3D printing, and Maker Faires, and overtones of grassroots activism and yet another this-changes-everything movement.I note a corresponding increase in the interaction design research discourse-but here, the word is used slightly more broadly to include construction, programming, and other craft-like activities forming part of the core of traditional design practice.That is also the sense in which I will be using the word here.In his influential effort to charac-T Insights → Making in the context of interaction design research refers to craftlike activities drawing on the core of traditional design practice.→ Making is necessary to explore non-idiomatic interaction concepts.→ Making helps structure collaborative projects with extramural partners.→ Making yields artifacts whose roles in the knowledge-producing discourse of a design research community are still unclear.