Re: Who is in favour of empirical research approach?

I'd like to echo José's appreciation of all the useful links provided  
over the last few days.

I currently work within a health policy research setting, although my  
background is in graphic design. For my PhD, I'm looking at the use of  
information graphics in the area. As you might expect, I come across a  
lot of research that fits into José's type (2):

> (2) empirical researchers who know how to calculate if there is  
> statistically significant difference between materials,
> but who does not know how to design (or select) materials that can  
> be considered as good enough by designers,

You may wish to look at some of the following for examples of  
sophisticated statistical analysis. And very poor designs being  
tested...


Benbasat, I. & Dexter, A. S. (1985). An Experimental Evaluation Of  
Graphical And Color-enhanced Information Presentation. Management  
Science, 31, 1348-1364.

Elting, L. S., Martin, C. G., Cantor, S. B., & Rubinstein, E. B.  
(1999). Influence of data display formats on physician investigators'  
decisions to stop clinical trials: prospective trial with repeated  
measures.  BMJ, 318, 1527-1531.

Feldman-Stewart, D., Brundage, M. D., & Zotov, V. (2007). Further  
Insight into the Perception of Quantitative Information: Judgments of  
Gist in Treatment Decisions. Medical Decision Making, 27, 34-43.

Frownfelter-Lohrke, C. (1998). The Effects of Differing Information  
Presentations of General Purpose Financial Statements on Users'  
Decisions. Journal of Information Systems, 12,  99-107.

Lim, K. H. & Benbasat, I. (2000). The Effect Of Multimedia On  
Perceived Equivocality And Perceived Usefulness Of Information  
Systems. MIS Quarterly, 24, 449-471.

Remus, W. (1984). An Empirical Investigation Of The Impact Of  
Graphical And Tabular Data Presentations On Decision Making.  
Management Science, 30, 533-542.

Remus, W. (1987). A Study Of Graphical And Tabular Displays And Their  
Interaction With Environmental Complexity. Management Science, 33,  
1200-1204.







Hope your research goes well José. It's an interesting area to look  
at. I do share the general view expressed in this thread that  
qualitative research is mostly the way to go in terms of evaluating  
information design. However, I do find a few statistical significance  
calculations invaluable for explaining the benefits of good  
information design to people that don't have a design background. I  
suspect it's not really necessary for designers to quote quantitative  
metrics when we discuss information design. Our design experience and  
time spent developing our visual communication skills seem to give us  
our own ways of measuring the success of our (and others') designs.  
But when I need to show the differences in comparative information  
presentations to those with no design backgrounds, I find that  
statistical analysis of quantitative metrics can be very useful. I  
think David Sless of the Communication Research Institute in Australia  
has come to similar conclusions, and I heartily recommend his paper in  
the Information Design Journal:
Sless, D. (2008). Measuring information design. Information Design  
Journal, 16, 250-258.


Cheers all, and keep up the good discussion and intellectual  
generosity :)

--Will.



...............................................

Will Stahl-Timmins B.A., M.A.
PhD Researcher: Information Graphics in Health Technology Assessment.

T: +44 (0) 1392 726 081
M: +44 (0) 7941 865 196
E: [email protected]

www.pms.ac.uk/infographics/
www.pms.ac.uk/pentag/
www.willstahl.com

PenTAG (Peninsula Technology Assessment Group)
Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry
Veysey Building
Salmon Pool Lane
Exeter
EX2 4SG


...............................................

Will Stahl-Timmins B.A., M.A.
PhD Researcher: Information Graphics in Health Technology Assessment.

T: +44 (0) 1392 726 081
M: +44 (0) 7941 865 196
E: [email protected]

www.pms.ac.uk/infographics/
www.pms.ac.uk/pentag/
www.willstahl.com

PenTAG (Peninsula Technology Assessment Group)
Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry
Veysey Building
Salmon Pool Lane
Exeter
EX2 4SG

On 7 Mar 2010, at 10:35, Jose Marconi Bezerra de Souza wrote:

> Wow!!
> EXCELLENT feedback.
> Thank you all for the generosity.
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> I suspect that there is another (maybe is the same) interesting  
> debate involving:
>
> (1) information designers who know how to design materials that  
> deserves to be tested,
> but do not (or reject to) know how  to design statistically based  
> experiments to test them,
>
> and
>
> (2) empirical researchers who know how to calculate if there is  
> statistically significant difference between materials,
> but who does not know how to design (or select) materials that can  
> be considered as good enough by designers,
>
> My personal challenge as a researcher (and teacher) is to find a  
> reasonable compromise between
> both competencies. I am doing my best so...
>
> I have learned from my experience as a PhD researcher that the
> so called "design thinking" should not be restricted to
> the design of information design artefacts.
> The real challenge is to apply design thinking to the
> of design experiments that compares those artefacts.
>
> One possible path is
> (1) to compare "design artifacts" that are recognised (or  
> celebrated) as good responses to a specific problem,
> and, if "statistically significant" difference is found
> (2) to Iook for theories that explain those results.
> It can be the other way around so.
> As Jorge has pointed out:
> what really matters is to find WHY something seems to be better
> in the artificial (and rather limited) experimental context.
>
> But, I can advance that to every reasonable explanation in favour of  
> "Design A",
> I can find an opposite (and quite reasonable too) explanation in  
> favour of "Design B".
> These contrasting views teach us about the
> possible scenarios in which A would be better than B and vice-versa.
> For me, this continuous re-thinking and re-contextualization of  
> apparently effective designs
> IS the core of the so called design research.
>
> José.
>
>
> On 6 March 2010 18:35, Rob Waller <[email protected]> wrote:
> The debate about empirical research rather easily descends into a  
> fight between "it's just your opinion" (scientists about designers)  
> and "you don't understand the real world" (designers about  
> scientists).
>
> A version of this debate has been going on as long as I can  
> remember, and before.
>
>
>
> From 1965: ‘Before scientific research, printers and type designers  
> were concerned mainly with the esthetic appearance of the printed  
> page. This preoccupation with esthetics, together with  
> considerations of economy and tradition, dominated all typography  
> until about 1920. As a result of these obstructive emphases, a  
> scientific typography has been slow in developing. Indeed, the  
> printing industry continues to resist procedural changes suggested  
> by experimental findings.’ Miles Tinker (1965) Bases for Effective  
> Reading, University of Minneapolis Press, page 115.
>
> From 1982: ‘[the technology of text] exists as a counterpoint to the  
> artistic and unsystematic approach to text design and layout that  
> has prevailed since petroglyphs were first inscribed on walls’.  
> David Jonassen (1982) The Technology of Text, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  
> Educational Technology Publications, page x.
>
> On the other hand...
>
> From 1931: ‘[the univariate research design] is good experimental  
> technique. It is an article of faith among investigators. Yet it  
> won’t work in the way it has been applied to typography unless one  
> is prepared to go to very unusual lengths with it.’ Buckingham BR  
> (1931) ‘New data on the typography of textbooks’ , Yearbook of the  
> National Society for the Study of Education, 30, page 104.
>
> From 1975: ‘No one, in our opinion, can possibly predict all the  
> variables that might interact with the one chosen for  
> experimentation. And even if a comprehensive list of variables could  
> (by some magic) be drawn up, the permutations would generate  
> millions of experiments – far more than could ever be executed… The  
> same mental set that predisposes researchers to choose problems that  
> can be neatly handled in a laboratory also inhibits them from going  
> outside their circle to see the problems that typographers face in  
> practice.’ Macdonald-Ross M & Waller RHW (1975) Criticisms,  
> alternatives and tests: a framework for improving typography,  
> Programmed Learning & Educational Technology, 12, page 76
>
> __________________________________
>
> Rob Waller
> Department of Typography & Graphic Communication
> University of Reading
> T +44 (0) 118 378 6411
> M +44 (0) 7850 665933
>
> On 5 Mar 2010, at 20:00, Jose Marconi Bezerra de Souza wrote:
>
>> Dear Jorge,
>>
>> I will try to make myself clear:
>>
>> I am developing a list of arguments in favour of (or against, if  
>> you like) empirical research.
>> But, I am focused on empirical research that involves statistical  
>> analyses only.
>>
>> I am not looking for examples of design practice informed by  
>> empirical research.
>> I agree with you in relation to the "Information Design Journal".
>> I made a contribution myself.
>>
>> How about now? Any specific sugestion?
>>
>> Many thanks for asking.
>>
>> José.
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________
>
> Use the following address to post a message to all subscribers:
>  [email protected]
>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your options, visit:
>  http://list.InformationDesign.org/mailman/listinfo/infodesign-cafe
>
> For all Information Design matters:
>  http://InformationDesign.org
>
> Problems? Write to:
>  [email protected]
> ___________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> José Marconi Bezerra de Souza
> Visiting lecturer of Paraná Federal University, Brazil
> PhD - Department of Typography & Graphic Communication, The  
> University of Reading (UK)
> <ATT00001..txt>

___________________________________________________________________

Use the following address to post a message to all subscribers: 
 [email protected]

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your options, visit:
 http://list.InformationDesign.org/mailman/listinfo/infodesign-cafe

For all Information Design matters:
 http://InformationDesign.org

Problems? Write to:
 [email protected]
___________________________________________________________________