Interactivity and Design Research Diagrams

I've come across these two illustrations whilst researching cognitive models that will come in handy at some point.


What is Interaction?
www.dubberly.com/articles/what-is-interaction.html


An Evolving Map of Design Practice and Design Research
www.dubberly.com/articles/an-evolving-map-of-design-practice-and-design-research.html

1st PhD Practical Project

After a rewarding tutorial with Simon Biggs last week at ECA I am reinvigorated and refocused. A result of this meeting Simon suggested it is time I started planning my first practical project to test the theory I am reading against. This practical project would become my MPhil project and the transition into the PhD. It will span 2009 and 2010 and will focus upon my most recent area of interaction design research - mental models. I will start to unpack this idea at my next whiteboard tutorial with Chris Speed and Mark Wright next week. Simon and I agreed that my annual review should be in June and that I should prepare my project proposal for that review.

To be able to focus upon that project I have set up my first PhD Project Blog. This is a sub-blog to this main research blog and I will cross-post between the two. I will use that blog to explore the research literature into user mental models and represented (designer's) models, as well as using it to post my visual concepts, tests and evaluation.

The new blog can be found at http://phdproject01.wordpress.com/.

Why Do We Need Doctoral Study in Design?

I picked up this link to the following paper from an email from the Interaction Design community.
Why Do We Need Doctoral Study in Design? by Meredith Davis of North Carolina State University, North Carolina, USA.

Due to the death of a close family member in January I feel I have lost some research momentum. I have been doing a lot of reading, note-taking and annotating but of course I am not seeing any reward of application yet. It was in this context that I thought this paper could help to contextualise and re-focus what I should be doing.

The paper was US-focused and on reading it I found that the sections I found really useful were pages 1 - 4: Introduction and New Paradigms for Design Practice. After this the paper analyzes the results of a study which began to lack direct relevance for me.

In the bibliography I found five further sources to read that I will soon source (see below). I will add this paper to my annotatedBib blog soon and record its main relevances for future reference. Here I will simply list for now some of the main points of interest to me from these five sources.

Toward a model of innovation by H. Dubberly (2008) presents an organic, system-based approach to design thinking that shifts the process of design to experience away from objects. In doing so the scope of design influence can broaden "within larger and more complex social, cultural, physical, economic and technical systems."

Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing by A. Greenfield (2006) may prove beneficial as some background reading.

Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide by H. Jenkins (2006)is cited in connection with how "peoples sense of agency or control of outcomes" is a consequence of media convergence. I have read Henry Jenkins previous paper on narrative architecture that will prove useful in the future.

Design methods: Seeds of human futures by C. Jones (1970) discusses the hierarchy of design problems, and that "design action must address an intricate web of connections among people, activities, objects and settings."

Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design by Nardi and Kapetlinin (2006) may prove interesting. But right now I will hold judgment until I have read it fully. The reason I say this is that Davis (2008) summarizes the position of activity theory, and ends with a statement "our research strategies have to go beyond testing actions and operations in human factors labs and asking questions in focus groups that separate people from the settings in which relevant behaviour takes place". I wish to turn to the source to clarify the actual relevance of activity theory on interaction design.

References

DAVIS, M. (2008, Dec 31) Why Do We Need Doctoral Study in Design?. International Journal of Design [Online] 2:3. Available: http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/481/223

DUBBERLY, H. (2008) Toward a model of innovation. Interactions, 15(1), pp. 28-36.

GREENFIELD, A. (2006) Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

JENKINS, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.

JONES, J. C. (1970). Design methods: Seeds of human futures. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

NARDI, B., & Kapetlinin, V. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Gillian Crampton Smith links

"Interaction design is the creative design of the interaction between people and devices, systems or services. This interaction usually involves the ‘new technologies’ of computing and communications. But interaction design remains a design activity – like architectural, graphic or product design. And it concerns the social value and cultural meaning of what is designed, not only its functional efficiency and visual appeal." Gillian Crampton Smith and Philip Tabor 2007-08
http://www.interaction-venice.com/index.html

Through some research on designers of interfaces on Google Images I followed some Gillian Crampton Smith links to Crampton Smith and Philip Tabor's website. On it they have a reading lists for Interaction Design, Information Visualisation and other useful links which I reproduce here in order to archive them for future quick reference.

======

From http://www.interaction-venice.com/references-introductory.html

Introductory references

Strongly recommended

Bonsiepe, Gui. 1995. Dall’oggetto all’interfaccia. Mutazioni del design. Milan: Feltrinelli. (English trans: Interface: An Approach to Design. Maastricht: Jan van Eyck Akademie.)

Moggridge, Bill. 2007. Designing Interactions. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Negroponte, Nicholas. 1995. Being Digital. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
2004. Essere digitali. Milano: Sperling and Kupfer

Norman, Donald A. 1997. La caffettiera del masochista. Psicopatologia degli oggetti quotidiani. Florence: Giunti. (Trans. of The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books. 1988.)

Reas, Casey, and Ben Fry. 2007. Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Saffer, Dan. 2006. Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices. Berkeley CA: Peachpit.

Thackara, John. 2006. In the Bubble: Designing in a Complex World. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

White, Ron. 2004. Il computer. Come è fatto e come funzione, 7th edn. Milan: Mondadori. (Trans. of How Computers Work. Indianapolis: Que. 2006.)

Recommended

Botta, Massimo. 2006. Design dell’informazione. Tassonomie per la progettazione di sistemi grafici auto-nomatici. Trento: Artimedia.

Cameron, Andy, ed. 2004. The Art of Experimental Interaction Design (IdN Special O4). Hong Kong: IdN Publishing.

Caplin, Steve. 2001. Icon Design: Graphic Icons in Computer Interface Design. New York: Watson-Guptill.

Cooper, Alan, Robert Reimann, and David Cronin. 2007. About Face 3.0: The Esssentials of Interaction Design. New York: Wiley.

Cooper, Alan. 1999. Il disagio tecnologico. Perché i prodotti high-tech sono così difficili da usare e che cosa fare per migliorarli. Milan: Apogeo. (Trans. of The Inmates are Running the Asylum: Why High Tech Products Are Driving Us Crazy and How to Restore the Sanity. Indianapolis: Sams. 1999.)

Garito, Maria Amata, Giovanni Anceschi, and Massimo Botta. 2006. L’ambiente dell’apprendimento. Web design e processi cognitive. Milan: McGraw-Hill.

Maeda, John. 2004. Creative Code: Aesthetics and Computation. London: Thames & Hudson.

Norman, Donald A. 1995. Le cose che ci fanno intelligenti. Il posto della tecnologia nel mondo dell'uomo. Milan: Feltrinelli, Milano, 1995. (Trans. of Things that Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. 1993.)

Petzold, Charles. 2000. Codice. Il linguaggio segreto dei computer. Milan: Mondadori. (Trans. of Code: The Hidden Language of Computer Hardware and Software. Redmond WA: Microsoft Press. 1999.)

Preece, Jenny, Yvonne Rogers, and Helen Sharp. 2007. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley. (Italian trans. of 1st edn: Interaction Design. Milan: Apogeo. 2004)

Studio 4.5 (Carola Zwick, Burkhard Schmitz, and Kerstin Kuhl). 2006. Designing for Small Screens: Mobile Phones, Smart Phones, PDAs, Pocket PCs, Navigation Systems, MP3 Players, Game Consoles. Switzerland: Ava.

======

From http://www.interaction-venice.com/references-infoviz.html

Information visualisation references

INFORMATION DESIGN BOOKS

Bertin, Jacques. La Semiologie Graphique.

Tufte, Edward R. 1983. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire CT: Graphics Press.

- 1990. Envisioning Information.
- 1997. Visual Explanations
- 2006. Beautiful evidence

ICON DESIGN BOOKS

Caplin, Steve. 2001. Icon Design: Graphic Icons in Computer Interface Design. New York: Watson-Guptill.

INFORMATION VISUALISATION LINKS
Periodic Table of visualisation techniques
http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html

Gallery of network visualisations
http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/

Information aesthetics
http://infosthetics.com/

Nice magnifying list (Jonathan Harris)
http://tenbyten.org/10x10.html

Jonathan Harris’s site
http://www.number27.org/

David Lu’s projects
www.velluminous.org
http://velluminous.org/portfolio/detail/?14

Visualising conversations:
(Boris Muller)
http://www.forestandthetrees.com/findr/findr.html
(Mike Migurski)
http://backchannel.stamen.com/

Semantic links between websites (only still pix at the moment)
http://www.ralphammer.de/projects/sinnzeug/sinnzeug_en.html

Power links between companies (Josh On)
http://www.theyrule.net/
(other work by Josh)
http://www.futurefarmers.com/josh/rca/index.html

Hyperbolic net visualisations
Visual thesaurus
Hypergraph - Hyperbolic graphs and trees : ThinkMap
KartOO visual meta search engine

Inxight: a spin off from Xerox Park from the visualization team of Stu Card
http://www.inxight.com/products/sdks/
Inxight StarTree
Inxight TimeWall
Inxight TableLens
(Inxight has been acqired by SAP. At present there are no pictures or demos on the site. Google 'hyperbolic visualisation' to find similar examples. 1/dec/2008)

Map of creativity
http://www.ngf.org.uk/map/map.html

Explore the Flikr space
http://www.quasimondo.com/tagnautica.php

World development statistics
G A P M I N D E R: HOME

Semantic Indexing
http://www.knowledgesearch.org/

Timelines (look at the live examples)
http://simile.mit.edu/timeline/

AT&T telecoms company’s visualisation research group
http://www.graphviz.org/Gallery.php

Overview of the stockmarket
www.smartmoney.com (look at Tools in the menu on the left)

======

From http://www.interaction-venice.com/references-useful-links.html

Useful links

GENERAL

Long running and important comment on ‘what is new technology for?’
http://www.doorsofperception.com/

Live|Work Service Design. Live|Work have pioneered service design as a design activity.
http://www.livework.co.uk/home.html

Interaction Design Association: a lot of interesting discusssions and resources
http://www.ixda.org/

Rather sharp blog on interaction design!
http://www.odannyboy.com/blog/archives/001000.html

Looks good, works well
Looks Good Works Well: Storyboarding Interesting Moments
http://looksgoodworkswell.blogspot.com/2005/11/interaction-matrix.html

We make money not art: design/technology/art
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009123.php

TECHNIQUES

Working with users
Cooper on personas (his company invented the name)
http://www.cooper.com/content/insights/newsletters_personas.asp

Working with users for service design
http://courses.interaction-ivrea.it/zoom/CirclesOfCare/index.html

IDEO’s methods cards
www.ideo.com/methodcards/MethodDeck/

Experience prototyping (Jane Fulton Suri, Marion Buchenau)
http://www.ideo.com/media/info.asp?x=6

Bill Gaver, Tony Dunne, Elena Pacenti: Cultural Probes
ACM Interactions Magazine February 1999
Flowcharting
Basic Flowcharting Symbols - The SmartDraw Flowchart Tutorial
Introduction to User Interface Flow Diagrams (UI Storyboards)

‘Quick and dirty’ video prototyping
http://insitu.lri.fr/imuseum/symposium1-results.html

Hill and Houde: "What do prototypes Prototype?"
http://www.viktoria.se/fal/kurser/winograd-2004/Prototypes.pdf

http://www.design.philips.com:80/about/design/section-13482/index.html

Information architecture tools
http://iainstitute.org/en/learn/tools.php

SOME NICE INTERACTIONS

Fresh interfaces for architects
http://www.intentionallies.co.jp/content_normal.html
http://www.andreescu-gaivoronski.com/and_gaiv.htm

Magical mystery tour
http://99rooms.terracontent.de/99rooms/99rooms.html

Flikr clock
http://www.quasimondo.com/clockr.php

Rijksmuseum: a beautiful light, delicate, pleasurable experience—a widget for the Macintosh
http://www.rijksmuseum.nl/aria/aria_assets/SK-C-210?lang=en

Elegant loading animation
http://www.sekisuiheim.com/desio-ae/

Animation sketch style
http://www.loworks.org/

Cognitive Modelling: Norman's 'Designer's Model'

Currently I am reading About Face 3 (Cooper et al.). In chapter 2 it deals with the existing position, dictated by software, of humans having to understand how computers 'logically' behave. Interaction design aims to rebalance digital products in favour of the human rather than the machine. By facilitating clearer cognitive behavioural understanding in the user, interactions can be made more beneficial to the user. Where this chapter really begins to become useful is in its explanation of conceptual models in order to visualise how humans and computers work.

The first model Donald Norman refers to as the system model. This is the cognitive model that explains the processing structure of the code. About Face 3 prefers to refer to it as the implementation model.

How code processes its actions and how human beings believe a computer/device/machine works are not the same. The human's mental model of how it works can be simplistic, counter-intuitive, fanciful, inaccurate, illogical; but as long as it helps the human successfully use their computer/device/machine it doesn't matter to them. Where a lot of problems arise within interactivity is the chasm that can form because these two mental models are representationally different. One is a mapping of actual processes - 'implementation', the other is purely notional - 'explanation'.

To interface between 'implementation' and 'explanation' a third model arises, a model that Donald Norman refers to as the designer's model, and Cooper et al refers to as a represented model. A designer's model that maps closer to a system/implementation model maybe more 'accurate' to the actual mechanics of processing, but is cognitively problematic to human users [A in diagram].

A successful interface is one where a user can see how their "goals and needs can be met" (Cooper et al, 2007, p32). This is achieved through making the designer's model follow as closely as possible the users' perceptions of how they believe they access the content [C in diagram].

There is nothing ground-breaking here in regard to interaction design, but it is the first time I have come across these definitions. I have known of the butler metaphor (Isaacs & Walendowski, 2002) but Cooper and Norman's models give it a more theoretical depth. Below is an expansion of the diagram in About Face 3 on page 30, with my annotations that link it back to my recent paper on the location of the graphic designer in GUI design.



Norman's designer's model and Cooper et al's similar represented model helps to give a cognitive psychological and theoretical base to the role that underpins the work of interface designers. In my paper I wrote about and cited Gillian Crampton Smith, former school director of Interaction Design Institute Ivrea. She sees the "graphic designers’ role as more involved in the interactive design process 'designing what a package is and what it does, and then designing what it will be like' (Aymer, 2001a, p33)". Graphic designers as part of their practice alternate between the “consideration of objective information and intuitive leaps” (Frascara, 2006, p32) in order to arrive at successful visual solutions. Graphic design, when performed well, can “inspire a behavourial change” in its audiences (Forlizzi & Lebbon, 2006, p53). These three points I raised and discussed in my paper can now also be assessed within the framework of the designer's model, and how effective are visual solutions when measured against the user's mental models.


References:

AYMER, G. (2001)a Norman Cooking. Create Online. 8. p38-40

COOPER, A., REIMAN, R. and CRONIN, D. (2007) About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design. Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing Inc.

FRASCARA, J. (2006) Graphic Design: Fine Art or Social Science. In: A. BENNETT, ed. Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design - A Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, p26-35

FORLIZZI, J. and LEBBON, C. (2006) From Formalism to Social Significance in Communication Design. In: A. BENNETT, ed. Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design - A Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, p51-63

ISAACS, E. & WALENDOWSKI, A. (2002)Designing from Both Sides of the Screen: How Designers and Engineers Can Collaborate to Build Cooperative Technology. New Riders Publishing

Back to Top

Current update on research position

Following the completion of my first paper demonstrating the development of my research I thought I'd best keep sight of where my research position currently stands. Below is a diagram I have produced, based upon a diagram explaining user experience, that I believe locates my bibliographic sources to date. The original diagram is from About Face 3 by Alan Cooper et al.*

The Diagram
The diagram below has been adapted and annotated to place additional information upon it that supports the locating of my current references. These locations are relative, emblematic and arbitrary, serving only to spatially identify where I believe my literature review is concentrated. I am initially weighting it from the visual communication perspective, but in order to balance it I have dialectically balanced it with sources from computer science (sources 10 & 19) and interaction design (sources 16, 17 & 25) literature. The numbering relates directly to the bibliography of 28 sources I used for the paper. The bibliography follows. In the next phase of research I am moving my position more towards the interaction sphere of literature from visual communication.



The Current Bibliography
1. AYMER, G. (2001)a Norman Cooking. Create Online. 8. p38-40

2. AYMER, G. (2001)b Interaction Guaranteed. Create Online. 10. p32-33

3. AYMER, G. (2002) The Big IDEO. Create Online. 29. p48-51

4. BRUINSMA, M. and VAN DER MEULEN, S. (2003) Deep Sites: Intelligent Innovation in Contemporary Web Design. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd

5. BURGOYNE, P. (2002) GB: Graphic Britain. London: Laurence King Publishing

6. CROWLEY, D. (2004) Design Magazines and Design Culture. In: R. POYNOR, ed. Communicate: Independent British Graphic Design since the Sixties. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., pp182-199

7. FRASCARA, J. (2006) Graphic Design: Fine Art or Social Science. In: A. BENNETT, ed. Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design - A Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, p26-35

8. FORLIZZI, J. and LEBBON, C. (2006) From Formalism to Social Significance in Communication Design. In: A. BENNETT, ed. Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design - A Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, p51-63

9. HELLER, S. (2006) Better Skills Through Better Research. In: A. BENNETT, ed. Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design - A Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, p10-13

10. JOHNSON, J., ROBERTS, T.L., VERPLANK, W., SMITH, D.C., IRBY, C., BEARD, M. AND MACKEY, K. (1989) The Xerox "Star": A Retrospective. [online] (accessed on the World Wide Web 4/1/2009 http://www.digibarn.com/friends/curbow/star/retrospect/)

11. LAUREL, B. ed (2003) Design Research: Methods and Perspectives. London: MIT Press

12. MACDONALD, N. (2003) What is Web Design?. Hove: RotoVision SA

13. MACDONALD, N. (2004)a British Web Design: A Brief History. In: R. POYNOR, ed. Communicate: Independent British Graphic Design since the Sixties. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., pp200-215

14. MACDONALD, N. (2004)b The British Evasion: How they missed the boat in yet another revolution led by the Americans. Print. 58(6) p38, 332

15. MACDONALD, N. (2004)c In With the New. Creative Review. 24(9) pp49-50, 52

16. MOGGRIDGE, B. (2007) Designing Interactions. MIT Press

17. NORMAN, D.A. (1998) The Design of Everyday Things. MIT Press

18. O’REILLY, J. (2004) Thinking with Images. In: R. POYNOR, ed. Communicate: Independent British Graphic Design since the Sixties. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., pp216-231

19. PERRY, T.S. and VOELCKER, J. eds. (1989) Of mice and menus: Designing the user-friendly interface. Reprinted from IEEE Spectrum, September 1989, pp. 46-51. [online] (accessed from the World Wide Web 30/12/08 http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/ofmiceandmenus)

20. POYNOR, R. (1999) Made in Britain: The Ambiguous Image. In N. BARLEY et al. Lost and Found: Critical Voices in New British Design. London: Birkhauser Verlag AG/The British Council. Pp 28-31

21. POYNOR, R. ed. (2003) No More Rules: Graphic Design and Postmodernism. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd.

22. POYNOR, R. (2004) Spirit of Independence. In: R. POYNOR, ed. Communicate: Independent British Graphic Design since the Sixties. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., pp.12-47

23. ROACH, G. (2002). More Than Words. Create Online. 27, July. pp48-51

24. ROCK, M. and POYNOR, R. (1995) What Is This Thing Called Graphic Design Criticism? Eye. 4 (16) pp56-59

25. SAFFER, D. (2007) Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices. Berkley, CA: New Riders

26. TOGNAZZINI, B. (1998) The Sorry State of Web Design. [online] (accessed on the World Wide Web 2/1/2009 http://www.asktog.com/columns/015WebDesignRant.html)

27. TOGNAZZINI, B. (2000) Elephants in the Living Room: The Destructive Role of Denial in Web Design. [online] (accessed on the World Wide Web 2/1/2009 http://www.asktog.com/columns/039Elephant.html)

28. TOGNAZZINI, B. (2003) It's Time We Got Respect. [online] (accessed on the World Wide Web 2/1/2009 http://www.asktog.com/columns/057ItsTimeWeGotRespect.html)



*Cooper, A., Reiman, R. and Cronin, D. (2007) About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design. Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing Inc. p xxxi
Back to Top

Where’s the graphic designer in the graphical user interface?

It's been a while since I last posted as I had a paper to research and write. The paper "Where’s the graphic designer in the graphical user interface?" informs my contextual review and the findings within it aid the positioning of myself within interaction design research from a visual communication perspective.

I will only give a summary here and briefly outline my intention for its use.

The paper charts the involvement of graphic designers within the development of graphical user interfaces (GUI) across software and online/offline digital products since the 1970s. This is in order to discover what influence and involvement graphic design, as a discipline, now bears upon interaction design. The paper is limited to 3,000 words and so does not go into the history of GUI development.
The paper can be downloaded here as a pdf.

To support the paper I wish to add here some images that were useful to my research. The paper is intentionally unillustrated as, although it is about a visual medium, I wished the text to position the past, current and future state of graphic designers' involvement before I then move the research onto actual practioners. Therefore the images I am posting below are the starting point for the next paper I propose upon this research. This will then form the first part of my contextual study moving deeper into interaction design literature, before exploring the other areas of the diagram in previous posts.

A History of the GUI Timeline

Jeremy Reimer
arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars/8 | Published: May 05, 2005

Original Apple Icon Graphics
Susan Kare

www.kare.com/portfolio/03_apple_macicons.html

Original Apple MacPaint Graphics
Susan Kare

www.kare.com/portfolio/04_apple_macpaint.html

Original Apple Typography
Susan Kare

www.kare.com/portfolio/05_apple_fonts.html

Xerox Star GUI Icon Ideas (circa 1979)
Norm Cox

www.digibarn.com/collections/software/xerox-star/xerox-world-according-to-norm.html

Xerox Star Final Icons (circa 1980)
Norm Cox et al

www.digibarn.com/collections/software/xerox-star/xerox-world-according-to-norm.html

Design Critique - initial commentors to read

Through an initial literature search of visual communication and graphic design the following people have been cited quite frequently. Some I know and have read, some are new. I list their names here merely as an aide-mémoire. I will comment on their critiques later. They are:

• Rick Poynor - a writer and critic based in London specializing in visual culture
  
• Nico MacDonald - a writer on the nexus of design, business and technology
  
• Michael Rock - a founding partner and creative director at 2x4 and Professor of Design at the Yale University School of Art
  
• Steven Heller - author, co-author or editor of over 100 books on graphic design
  

Additional update - Simon Biggs has given me the following names. Some I have read, some are new. I will source them when I return to the interactive literature after I have a visual communication literature position. The authors are: Jenny Preece, Alan Dix, Gillian Crampton Smith, John Maeda, Brian Reffin Smith, Brian Massumi, Brenda Laurel and Donald Norman. I list these names here as another aide-mémoire for future reference.

Developing a Research Position - Part 1 - Design Theory

I enhanced the previous diagram following a coffee tutorial with Chris. The new diagram concentrates solely upon the question about visual communication literature. Future diagrams will tackle the remaining questions. The essays quoted above are only a initial selection taken from a design theory reader (reference below). This enhanced diagram charts the first attempt at assigning relationships between the graphic design literature and interaction design. The links are untested and therefore are indicated as faint.

Bennet, A., ed., (2006) Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design. New York: Princeton Architectural Press

First visualisation of research

Based upon the whiteboard brainstorm I have attempted to clarify the information that that contained. This is a diagram to use in my next tutorial with Chris and to be understood in context to my previous Abstract draft.



On the image are several areas of questioning that can be expanded over the coming weeks through posts and tutorials.