Author Archive

Type anywhere, literally (ADA not approved though)

Posted in Uncategorized on February 21, 2010 by Jin Yao

http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/12/diy-keyboard-pants-destined-for-the-geek-catwalk/

Great example of low-fi ubicomp design. Now if they can have keyboard shirts (with keys on the sleeves…

Advertisements

Interesting mash-up

Posted in Uncategorized on February 17, 2010 by Jin Yao

http://pleaserobme.com

I knew Twittering wasn’t good for you.

Arguments

Posted in 06.Design Thinking & Sketching on February 17, 2010 by Jin Yao

The dialectics of sketching

Question:

The paper makes an interesting observation of patterns in sketching that certainly holds true for me. My”active” sketching phase, as shown by the subjects, are longer than contemplating or reflecting the sketch at the moment. However, there are certainly many questions left unanswered in the study. For example, there is no investigation to the amount of time or effort in the contemplating phases. The sketch artist may continue to “sketch” in his mind while contemplating his current sketch. While the study protocol has indicated that the subjects were tasked with think-aloud protocol, there was no analysis in this regard. It would be interesting to see a higher granularity for the argument mapping as shown in Figure 10 of the paper. I suspect there are many more variations and creations within the sketcher’s mind beyond what was drawn on the piece of paper.

The Design Studio

Question:

The study proposed in the paper is certainly interesting. It would be more interesting to apply his approach into other subjects that have similar process, such as software engineering. Just like in physical architecture, software architecture possess its own design limitation and design space not unlike that of physical one. Spaces for building can be easily equated to memory space and structural stability can be similar to algorithm’s integrity and stability. Software engineering differs slightly in that the design space limitations are more abstract. 10,000 element-wide array is, in my opinion, more abstract than 10,000 square meters. With this in mind, how would the designer’s reflection differ? Would it be difficult to recruit architects that are proficient in both buildings and software?

What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis

For:

The study shows an interesting promise for creating a map for thought-process in sketching. The evaluation data and conclusion shows that someone experienced and knowledgeable in the subject produce longer “continuing chunk” is not surprising.  The observation certainly has some validation in real-life, I believe. Whether having a larger proportion of “continuous chunk” produce better design or ideas are very much debatable. Longer continuous chunk may indicate longer focus on an idea or element, but it could also mean that there was less exploration of idea involved. The paper’s inclusion about relationships between chunk holds the most interesting idea. Rather than applying statistical analysis, I believe that there’s much more to be gained by analyzing the relationship or transition from chunks to chunk. The paper also acknowledge this sentiment in their future works section.

Creativity Debate

Posted in 05.Creativity and Design on February 10, 2010 by Jin Yao

“The Creators’ Patterns” by Howard Gardner

Question:

Is it even possible to conduct a study on creativity with large enough scope to generate an organized framework around it? The “inherently interdisciplinary” nature of creativity as described by Gardner makes it seems daunting task.

Argument against:

“Clearly there is a bias toward individuals who have been revolutionary rather than evolutionary” – It is very difficult to conclude that such bias exist, because the judgment of “evolution/revolution” itself is very subjective. The example that Gardner gave of this through music of Bach may support his line of reasoning, but would it necessarily work with other domains. We are also disregarding the nature of artistic domain, in which judgments of works are more subjective than other domains. Beyond the evolutionary/revolutionary debate, Gardner seems to contradict his very own previous statement, in which he admits that his study was limited. How can he make this conclusion, when he himself admits his study was limited in sampling?

“Faustian Bargain” – The conclusion that “creators are willing, so to speak, to sell their souls in order that their creative juices can continue to flow”, seems too dramatic and again reflects Gardner’s limited sampling. The examples he cites certainly illustrates that the creators made self-sacrifices or behaved in eccentric ways for their creative works. However, this conclusion does not account for much serendipitous creativities that has come past. Would Gardner characterize Sir Alexander Fleming to have “sold his soul” to accidentally discover penicillin? How about George Crum’s invention of potato chips when he was frustrated by a customer and attempted to play a practical joke?

“Environments for Creativity – A Lab for Making Things” by Ellen Yi-Luen Do and Mark D Gross

Argument against:

The conclusion that creativity can be cultivated seems too “conclusive”. Results from exercises and workshop lessons, may yield the results that can suggest improvement or creation of creativity within individuals. However, would the experience gained in such activity be generalized well enough for said individuals to tackle all kinds of activity beyond those practiced in an instructed environment? It seems to ignore the question that individuals with similar instruction or training produces vast differences in resulting works.

“Engineers tend be more goal-oriented and stay within their field of expertise and treat ambiguity as something to be eliminated.” – This statement seems very naïve perspective upon engineering field in general. It is universally true that engineers rely heavily upon precision and accurate interpretation of the design space. However, it is quite unfair to conclude that engineers want to “eliminate” ambiguity. Engineers certainly recognize the need for ambiguity, especially in process of designing a solution to overcome their design problems. This is very evident in software domain, in which companies pride itself to challenge recruits with creative design problems and riddles.

“Design Protocol Data and Novel Design Decisions” by Omer Atkin and Chengtah Lin

Questions:

Is there a practical limit on the amount of information collected during the design exercise? How would the information correlate to the exact “eureka” moment? Would bandwidth for such information be “infinite”?

Would there be any difference if the design process was performed in a “virtual world”? Will the environmental effect change the parameter for design decisions and its work flow?

How would changes in the experimental subject affect the study’s conclusion? How would a non-professional designer (unlike the Xerox folks in the paper) perform in such study? Would they also show similar patterns in design decisions?