Show simple item record

contributor authorJohnson, Erin
contributor authorToh, Christine
contributor authorMenold, Jessica
date accessioned2025-08-20T09:32:53Z
date available2025-08-20T09:32:53Z
date copyright11/5/2024 12:00:00 AM
date issued2024
identifier issn1050-0472
identifier othermd_147_5_051402.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4308459
description abstractHuman subjects are often used in design theory and methods studies to understand how designers behave and link behaviors with design outcomes. We highlight that much of our past work and resultant knowledge in design theory and methodology (DTM) has used data from samples composed mainly of White men. We argue, therefore, that the tools, methods, and practices conceived through research intended for universal use may not be as generalizable as intended. We support this assertion through a quantitative assessment of past DTM literature. We definitively demonstrate a historic lack of diversity in human-subjects research in DTM through a critical review of 109 published works. Our findings suggest that age, gender, and race/ethnic background are underreported. This work is a call to action for researchers to reflect on who are the beneficiaries of design theory and methods research, how participant background might impact the findings, and what strategies can be employed to fulfill our promise of a more equitable design community and impact.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleWho Does Design Research Serve? A Critical Evaluation of the Diversity of Samples Studied in Design Theory and Methods Research
typeJournal Paper
journal volume147
journal issue5
journal titleJournal of Mechanical Design
identifier doi10.1115/1.4066685
journal fristpage51402-1
journal lastpage51402-12
page12
treeJournal of Mechanical Design:;2024:;volume( 147 ):;issue: 005
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record