Design academics struggle in effectively reaching out to design practice, while design practitioners have difficulties in appropriating academic output. In their turn, design practitioners create new local knowledge that may not be recognised (as such) by design academics. This situation is seen as suboptimal and problematised as the research-practice gap. This paper addresses how knowledge exchange between design research and practice can be understood and improved. We therefore introduce and investigate a social co-design case study which bridged the gap between research and practice and which shows how knowledge development within academia, professional design practice, and non-professional design practice are interwoven. We analyse the case through an alternative template analysis incorporating four perspectives on ‘the gap’: abstraction, communication, alignment of knowledge needs, supporting local knowledge production. We compare and interrelate these four perspectives. This refines our theoretical understanding of the research-practice gap and provides implications and actionable insights about practitioner-centred knowledge production for design academics who want to contribute to design practice.
LINK
The gap between research and design practice has long been a concern for the HCI community. In this article, we explore how different translations of HCI knowledge might bridge this gap. A literature review characterizes the gap as having two key dimensions - one between general theory and particular artefacts and a second between academic HCI research and professional UX design practice. We report on a 5-year engagement between HCI researchers and a major media company to explore how a particular piece of HCI research, the trajectories conceptual framework, might be translated for and with UX practitioners. We present various translations of this framework and fit them into the gap we previously identified. This leads us to refine the idea of translations, suggesting that they may be led by researchers, by practitioners or co-produced by both as boundary objects. We consider the benefits of each approach.
MULTIFILE
Algorithmic affordances—interactive mechanisms that allow users to exercise tangible control over algorithms—play a crucial role in recommender systems. They can facilitate users’ sense of autonomy, transparency, and ultimately ownership over a recommender’s results, all qualities that are central to responsible AI. Designers, among others, are tasked with creating these interactions, yet state that they lack resources to do so effectively. At the same time, academic research into these interactions rarely crosses the research-practice gap. As a solution, designers call for a structured library of algorithmic affordances containing well-tested, well-founded, and up-to-date examples sourced from both real-world and experimental interfaces. Such a library should function as a boundary object, bridging academia and professional design practice. Academics could use it as a supplementary platform to disseminate their findings, while both practitioners and educators could draw upon it for inspiration and as a foundation for innovation. However, developing a library that accommodates multiple stakeholders presents several challenges, including the need to establish a common language for categorizing algorithmic affordances and devising a categorization of algorithmic affordances that is meaningful to all target groups. This research attempts to bring the designer perspective into this categorization.
LINK
The road to science for the arts therapies requires research on the full breadths of the spectrum, from systematic case studies to RCTs. It is important that arts therapists and arts therapeutic researchers reflect on the typical characteristics of each research paradigm, research type and research method and select what is appropriate with regard to the particular research question. Questions rather differ. Finding out whether a certain intervention has a particular effect with a large group of clients differs from wanting to know which change occurs at which moment by which interventions in the treatment of an individual client. Research in practice remains close to questions encountered by arts therapists in their daily practice. It concerns questions arts therapists have about their lived experience of acting due to the complexity and variability of practice. By carrying out research in practice that links up with those questions, evidence evolves; evidence that enables the professional to proceed and that makes explicit what often remains implicit and unsaid. What is explicit can be communicated, can be criticised and tested. The professional himself does the road to science of the profession. The investment in professionals’ research in practice is the motor of knowledge-productivity that bridges the theory-practice gap. Research in the arts therapies should lead to ‘knowledge’ in which the ‘art’, nor the ‘subject’ of therapist and client have been lost.
DOCUMENT
This study explores the evaluation of research pathways of self-management health innovations from discovery to implementation in the context of practice-based research. The aim is to understand how a new process model for evaluating practice-based research provides insights into the implementation success of innovations. Data were collected from nine research projects in the Netherlands. Through document analysis and semi-structured interviews, we analysed how the projects start, evolve, and contribute to the healthcare practice. Building on previous research evaluation approaches to monitor knowledge utilization, we developed a Research Pathway Model. The model’s process character enables us to include and evaluate the incremental work required throughout the lifespan of an innovation project and it helps to foreground that innovation continues during implementation in real-life settings. We found that in each research project, pathways are followed that include activities to explore a new solution, deliver a prototype and contribute to theory. Only three projects explored the solution in real life and included activities to create the necessary changes for the solutions to be adopted. These three projects were associated with successful implementation. The exploration of the solution in a real-life environment in which users test a prototype in their own context seems to be a necessary research activity for the successful implementation of self-management health innovations.
MULTIFILE
Increasingly aware of the importance of active lifestyles, many people intend to exercise more. One of the main challenges is to translate exercise intentions into actual exercise behaviour, the so-called intention-behaviour gap. To investigate barriers and enablers that affect this gap, we conducted a 7-day diary study with 16 women. Participants indicated what their exercise intentions and behaviour were per day, and whether and why they changed retrospectively during the day. Through the diary study, we gain insights into (i) the intention-behaviour interplay, and (ii) the experienced barriers and enablers that influence this interplay throughout the day. Based on the findings, we contribute new implications for design in supporting people translating their intentions into exercise behaviour. We propose three design concepts to illustrate underlying design opportunities. The focus is on positively influencing the interplay of enablers and barriers of exercising and how these can be addressed through design
DOCUMENT
This opinion piece addresses issues surrounding the role of researchers’ behaviour in bridging the science–policy gap in sustainable tourism mobility. Currently, the research agenda on bridging this gap encompasses the development of fuller understanding of the determinants of tourist behaviours, and only a partial understanding of the behaviour of policy-makers and industry. That latter area needs research to identify how those key actors can be encouraged towards developing sustainable tourism mobility. This paper argues that key determinants of researchers' behaviour need to be added to that research agenda. It discusses seven tensions and structures hindering researchers exploring how to mobilise and engage with other industry and policy-makers, including dangers related to the politicisation of science, balancing objectivity and engagement, and the consequences of the current publication culture that characterises the academic community. The discussion concludes with a call for action to researchers to address these tensions and structures. It suggests four ways forward, including informed and skilled engagement with the quality mass media, using proven methods of academic–industry cooperation, workshops to help editors and reviewers to better understand practice-linked, values-driven research issues and the creation of a policy-makers' industry and researchers' action group to encourage joint projects.
LINK
Expectations are high for digital technologies to address sustainability related challenges. While research into such applications and the twin transformation is growing rapidly, insights in the actual daily practices of digital sustainability within organizations is lacking. This is problematic as the contributions of digital tools to sustainability goals gain shape in organizational practices. To bridge this gap, we develop a theoretical perspective on digital sustainability practices based on practice theory, with an emphasis on the concept of sociomateriality. We argue that connecting meanings related to sustainability with digital technologies is essential to establish beneficial practices. Next, we contend that the meaning of sustainability is contextspecific, which calls for a local meaning making process. Based on our theoretical exploration we develop an empirical research agenda.
MULTIFILE
The Best Practice Unit (BPU) model constitutes a unique form of practice-based research. A variant of the Community of Practice model developed by Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2002), the BPU has the specific aim of improving professional practice by combining innovation and research. The model is used as a way of working by a group of professionals, researchers and other relevant individuals, who over a period of one to two years, work together towards a desired improvement. The model is characterized by interaction between individual and collective learning processes, the development of new or improved working methods, and the implementation of these methods in daily practice. Multiple knowledge resources are used, including experiential knowledge, professional knowledge and scientific knowledge. The research serves diverse purposes: articulating tacit knowledge, documenting learning and innovation processes, systematically describing the working methods that have been revealed or developed, and evaluating the efficacy of the new methods. Each BPU is supported by a facilitator, whose main task is to optimize learning processes. An analysis of ten different BPUs in different professional fields shows that this is a successful model. The article describes the methodology and results of this study.
DOCUMENT
