Facebook Pixel Code
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Differences of the Participatory Design and Action Research Essay Example

Show related essays

Differences of the Participatory Design and Action Research

This is a preview of the 11-page document
Read full text

Differences of the Participatory Design and Action Research. There are some distinctive goals that characterize the participatory design. One of the goals of this methodology is to ensure there is maximum participation of stakeholders. People from different areas of specialization are to be involved in research is to be done using this kind of approach. The broad base of expertise is used so that the quality of the human-centered technology that is to be recommended be of high quality (Blomberg & Henderson, 1990). The other goal of this type of methodology is to come up with prototyping of ideas aimed at solving a problem in the society. It is at this point that designers and users join ideas so that they can come up with technological tools that match the workplace of the tools (Lindsay, Jackson, &

Schofield, 2012).
Under this approach, if a human-centered technology is to be developed, there are three stages that must be followed. Step one is the initial exploration of work. At this level, the designers of the intended technology to meet with the users. They take this opportunity to analyze the working environment that the innovation will be introduced into. Step two is the discovery process where the users and designers get to discuss the values expected for their work areas and the goals that the project can have. The final stage is prototyping where the tools to be introduced are tailored to match the work environment that exists. All these steps are followed with an aim of coming up with a human-centered technology. It is also important to note that the participatory approach concentrates on ethnographic methods. Indirectly this means that it is more inclined towards being qualitative research since ethnography is usually qualitative (Lindsay, Jackson, & Schofield, 2012).
It is a participative research methodology that combines action and research. It is an approach to an American and English origin in the 1940s. In the United States, the father of action research is believed to be a psychologist called Kurt Lewin. Differences of the Participatory Design and Action Research.

This is a preview of the 11-page document
Open full text


Axup, J., & Foth, M. (2006). Participatory Design and Action Research: Identical Twins or Synerfetic Pair. In PDC-06 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (pp. 93 -96). Trento, Italy: CPSR.

Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory Research Methods: A Methodological Approach in Motion. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung , 191-222.

Bjerknes, G., & Bratteteig, T. (1995). User Participation and Democracy: A Discussion of Scandinavian Research on System Development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 7(1) , 1.

Bjerknes, M. S., & Bjork, I. T. (2012). Entry into Nursing: An Ethnographic Study of Newly Qualified Nurses Taking on the Nursing Role in a Hospital Setting. Oslo: Department of Nursing Science, University of Oslo.

Blomberg, J. L., & Henderson, A. (1990,March). Reflections on Participatory Design: Lessons from the Trillium Experience. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 353-360). ACM.

Hayes, G. R. (2011). The Relationship of Action Research to Human-Computer Interaction. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 18(3) , 15.

Hearn, G. N., & Foth, M. (2005). Action Research in the Design of New Media and ICT Systems. Topical Issues in Communications and Media Research , 79-94.

Kensing, F., & Blomberg, J. (1998). Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(3-4) , 167-185.

Lindsay, S., Jackson, D., & Schofield, G. (2012). Engaging Older People Using Participatory Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1199-1208). New York: ACM.

Mathiassen, L., Chiasson, M., & Germonprez, M. (2012). Style Composition in Action Research Publication. MIS quarterly, 36(2) , 347-363.

Pascal, A., Thomas, C., & Romme, A. G. (2013). Developing a Human‐centred and Science‐based Approach to Design: The Knowledge Management Platform Project. British Journal of Management, 24(2) , 264-280.

Ravera, F., Hubacek, K., Reed, M., & Tarrasón, D. (2011). Learning from Experiences in Adaptive Action Research: a Critical Comparison of Two Case Studies Applying Participatory Scenario Development and Modelling Approaches. Environmental Policy and Governance , 433-453.

Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., & Preece, J. (2011). Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Sanders, E. B., Brandt, E., & Binder, T. (2010, November). A Framework for Organizing the Tools and Techniques of Participatory Design. In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference (pp. 195-198). ACM.

Zoltowski, C. B., Oakes, W. C., & Cardella, M. E. (2012). Students Ways of Experiencing Human‐Centered Design. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1) , 28-59.

Close ✕
Tracy Smith Editor&Proofreader
Expert in: Technology, Engineering and Construction, Information Technology
Hire an Editor
Matt Hamilton Writer
Expert in: Technology, Agriculture, Military
Hire a Writer
preview essay on Differences of the Participatory Design and Action Research
  • Pages: 11 (2750 words)
  • Document Type: Essay
  • Subject: Technology
  • Level: Undergraduate
WE CAN HELP TO FIND AN ESSAYDidn't find an essay?

Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples

Contact Us