Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T22:17:13.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

USING DESIGN METHODS TO EXPLORE THE CONTEXT OF COMPLEX BEHAVIORAL DESIGN PROBLEMS IN THE EARLY STAGES OF BEHAVIOURAL DESIGN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Carolina Falcão Duarte  and
Jaap Daalhuizen
Carolina Falcão Duarte*
Affiliation:
Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
Jaap Daalhuizen
Affiliation:
Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
*
Falcão Duarte, Carolina, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Denmark, cfadu@dtu.dk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Behavioural design has been gaining momentum to address critical societal challenges such as elderly care. At the same time, it struggles to deal with complex challenges and integrate multiple contextual factors' influence in domains like healthcare. Behavioural design processes lack guidance on how to prevent this and instead define problems that are ecologically valid. Conventional design methods do guide designers to do this. Thus there is a need to investigate how design methods can support behavioural designers to explore the context and integrate multiple perspectives on the problem, resulting in context-sensitive problem definitions. To respond to this need, we present a case where designers used a combination of design methods to investigate the complex context of hygiene in nursing homes. We show how combining different design methods supported the designers in advancing their understanding of a complex context and the problematic behaviours that occurred in it. We conclude by discussing the importance of using design methods to reveal important insights at the early stages of the behavioural design process.

Keywords

Behavioural designCase studyElderly careDesign methodsComplexity
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 3741 - 3750
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Bay Brix Nielsen, C. K. E., Daalhuizen, J. and Cash, P. J, . (2021) ‘Defining the Behavioural Design Space’, International Journal of Design, 15(1), pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
van Boeijen, A., Daalhuizen, J. and Zijlstra, J. (2020) Delft Design Guide. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.Google Scholar
Bowen, S. et al. (2016) ‘The value of designers’ creative practice within complex collaborations’, Design Studies, 46, pp. 174–198. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.DESTUD.2016.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, N. J. et al. (2009) ‘Theorizing Social Context: Rethinking Behavioral Theory’, Health education & behavior: the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 36(5 0), p. 55S. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198109335338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cammer, A. et al. (2014) ‘The Hidden Complexity of Long-Term Care: How Context Mediates Knowledge Translation and Use of Best Practices’, The Gerontologist, 54(6), pp. 1013–1023. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/GERONT/GNT068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrasco, M. A. et al. (2021) ‘Behavioural and social science research opportunities’, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 99(11), p. 834. https://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.20.285370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cash, P., Gamundi, X. V. and Daalhuizen, J. (2022) ‘Method Use in Behavioural Design: What, How, and Why?’, (May). https://dx.doi.org/10.57698/v16i1.01.Google Scholar
Cash, P., Hartlev, C. G. and Durazo, C. B. (2017) ‘Behavioural design: A process for integrating behaviour change and design’, Design Studies, 48, pp. 96–128. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. (2008) Engineering design methods: strategies for product design: Strategies for product design. 2 ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley.Google Scholar
Daae, J. and Boks, C. (2017) ‘Tweaking interaction through understanding the user’, in Design for Behaviour Change. Routledge, pp. 74–92. https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315576602-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Design Council (2021) Beyond Net Zero: A Systemic Design Approach - Design Council. London. Available at: https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/skills-learning/tools-frameworks/beyond-net-zero-a-systemic-design-approach/ (Accessed: 6 December 2022).Google Scholar
Dorst, K. (2015) ‘Frame Innovation: Create new thinking by design’, The MIT Press, p. 221. Available at: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/frame-innovation (Accessed: 17 November 2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healthcare Denmark, (2019) A dignified elderly care in Denmark.Google Scholar
Herriott, R. (2019) ‘What kind of research is Research Through Design?’, International Association of Societies of Design Research Conference 2019.Google Scholar
Kreuter, M. W. et al. (2016) ‘Understanding Wicked Problems: A Key to Advancing Environmental Health Promotion’, https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104265597, 31(4), pp. 441–454. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198104265597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuijer, L. and de Jong, A. (2012) ‘Identifying design opportunities for reduced household resource consumption: exploring practices of thermal comfort’, Journal of Design Research, 10(1–2), pp. 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahy, C. et al. (2018) ‘Co-designing Behaviour Change in Healthcare’, Design as a catalyst for change - DRS International Conference 2018, pp. 25–28. https://dx.doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.317.Google Scholar
Lievesley, M. et al. (2022) ‘Co-designing for behaviour change: The development of a theory-informed oral-care intervention for stroke survivors’, Design for Health, pp. 1–23. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/24735132.2022.2096291.Google ScholarPubMed
Lockton, D. (2017) ‘Design, behaviour change and the Design with Intent toolkit’, in Design for Behaviour Change. Routledge, pp. 58–73. https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315576602-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockton, D., Harrison, D. and Stanton, N. A. (2010) ‘Design for Behaviour Change’, in Columbus, A. . (ed.) Advances in Psychology Research. Nova Science Publishers. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230800104 (Accessed: 25 October 2021).Google Scholar
Mattelmäki, T. (2006) Design probes. University of Art and Design Helsinki. Available at: https://shop.aalto.fi/media/attachments/55d58/mattelmaki.pdf (Accessed: 6 December 2022).Google Scholar
Mattelmäki, T. (2008) ‘Probing for co-exploring’, CoDesign, 4(1), pp. 65–78. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattelmäki, T., Brandt, E. and Vaajakallio, K. (2011) ‘On designing open-ended interpretations for collaborative design exploration’, https://doi-org.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/10.1080/15710882.2011.609891, 7(2), pp. 79–93. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.609891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mody, L., Bradley, S. F. and Huang, S. S. (2013) ‘Keeping the “home” in nursing home: Implications for infection prevention’, JAMA Internal Medicine. NIH Public Access, pp. 853–854. https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ney, S. and Meinel, C. (2019) ‘Innovation, Wicked Problems and Design Thinking’, pp. 21–42. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19609-7_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niedderer, K., Clune, S. and Ludden, G. (2017) ‘Design's intrinsic relationship with change and its challenges for the 21st century’, in Design for Behaviour Change. Routledge, pp. 9–15. https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315576602-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, M. S. and Stilbo, R. (2022) Design of behavioural change interventions: Preventing spreading of contagious diseases in nursing homes - DTU Findit. DTU. Available at: https://findit.dtu.dk/en/catalog/62e9bcc574b3ffa446a32ebe (Accessed: 26 August 2022).Google Scholar
Prochner, I. and Godin, D. (2022) ‘Quality in research through design projects: Recommendations for evaluation and enhancement’, Design Studies, 78, p. 101061. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.DESTUD.2021.101061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, S. and Schmidt, R. (2018) A New Model for Integrating Behavioral Science and Design, Behavioural scientist. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/380085.Google Scholar
Sanders, E. B. N. and Stappers, P. J. (2014) ‘Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning’, Co-Design, 10(1), pp. 5–14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2014.888183.Google Scholar
Sanders, E. and Stappers, P. J. (2008) ‘Co-creation and the new landscapes of design’, Co-Design, 4(1), pp. 5–18. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. and Stenger, K. (2021) ‘Behavioral brittleness: the case for strategic behavioral public policy’, Behavioural Public Policy, pp. 1–26. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2021.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sengere, P. and Gaver, B. (2006) ‘Staying open to interpretation: Engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation’, Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, DIS, 2006, pp. 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundhedsstyrrelsen (2020) ‘Ny coronavirus, COVID-19 - Instruks Sundhedsstyrelsen’, pp. 1–9. Available at: https://www.sst.dk/da/corona.Google Scholar
von Thienen, J., Meinel, C. and Nicolai, C. (2014) ‘How design thinking tools help to solve wicked problems’, Design Thinking Research: Building Innovation Eco-Systems, pp. 97–102. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01303-9_7/COVER.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tromp, N. and Hekkert, P. (2014) ‘Social Implication Design (SID) – A design method to exploit the unique value of the artefact to counteract social problems’, in Design's Big Debates - DRS International Conference 2014. Umeå. Available at: https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/drs-conference-papers/drs2014/researchpapers/46 (Accessed: 12 April 2022).Google Scholar
Tromp, N. and Hekkert, P. (2018) Designing for Society: Products and Services for a Better World. 1st edn. Bloombury.Google Scholar
Tromp, N., Hekkert, P. and Verbeek, P. P. (2011) ‘Design for socially responsible behavior: A classification of influence based on intended user experience’, Design Issues, 27(3), pp. 3–19. https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/DESI_A_00087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wikström, E. and Emilsson, U. M. (2014) ‘Autonomy and Control in Everyday Life in Care of Older People in Nursing Homes’, Journal of Housing For the Elderly, 28(1), pp. 41–62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2013.858092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, J. and Forlizzi, J. (2014) ‘Research Through Design in HCI’, Ways of Knowing in HCI,pp. 167–189. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar