¿Qué quieres decir? Explorando fricciones interdisciplinarias al diseñar para la longevidad
Barra lateral del artículo
- envejecimiento
- interdisciplinariedad
- fricción
- autoetnografía
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Descargas
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Con una población mundial prevista de 2.100 millones de personas de 60 años o más para 2050, es imperativo estudiar las implicancias de vivir más años y cómo diseñar soluciones que favorezcan el bienestar de las personas y promuevan su independencia. En este contexto, las colaboraciones interdisciplinarias, que reúnen distintos tipos de conocimientos especializados, pueden aportar soluciones creativas y eficaces. Sin embargo, rara vez se discuten las complejidades de trabajar en sinergia con otros. A partir de nuestras experiencias iniciales como investigadoras académicas, profundizamos en los matices de la investigación interdisciplinaria en el campo del diseño para una población que envejece. Mediante diálogos autoetnográficos entre las autoras y entrevistas semiestructuradas con profesionales de diversas disciplinas, descubrimos y debatimos las fricciones inherentes a las colaboraciones interdisciplinarias. Nuestros resultados revelan tensiones en torno a la interpretación de los datos, las creencias ontológicas y epistemológicas, la evaluación de los resultados del proyecto y las consideraciones éticas. Proponemos un marco inicial para sortear estas fricciones de forma constructiva, fomentando el diálogo y el entendimiento entre los miembros del equipo. Al dar prioridad a las experiencias vividas y a la reflexividad, nuestro trabajo aporta ideas prácticas para la colaboración interdisciplinaria en el diseño para la longevidad, ofreciendo una perspectiva de las complejidades y oportunidades de navegar por las fronteras disciplinarias.
Detalles del artículo
Citas
Aigner-Walder, B., Gruber, M., Hagendorfer-Jauk, G., Krainer, D., Oberzaucher, J., & Pichler, C. (2023). Participatory research and development approaches in applied ageing research. In, A., Urbaniak & A., Wanka (Eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Approaches in Ageing Research (1st ed.), Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003254829
Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic Autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35 (4), 373–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449.
Atkinson P. (2006). Rescuing autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35, 400–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286980
Blackwell, A. F., Eckert, C. M., Bucciarelli, L. L., & Earl, C. F. (2009). Witnesses to Design: A Phenomenology of Comparative Design. Design Issues, 25 (1), 36–47. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20627792.
Borgman, C. L. (2012), The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 63, 1059-1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22634
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Bracken, L., & Oughton, E. (2006). 'What do you mean?' The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31 (3), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2006.00218.x
Carstensen, L. L., Turan, B., Scheibe, S., Ram, N., Ersner-Hershfield, H., Samanez-Larkin, G. R., Brooks, K. P., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2011). Emotional experience improves with age: Evidence based on over 10 years of experience sampling. Psychology and Aging, 26(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021285
Coughlin, J. F. (2009). Longevity, lifestyle and anticipating the new demands of aging on the transportation system. Public Works Management & Policy, 13 (4), 301–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X09335609
Döringer, S. (2020). ‘The problem-centred expert interview’. Combining qualitative interviewing approaches for investigating implicit expert knowledge. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24 (3), 265–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1766777
Dusdal, J. & Powell, J. J. P. (2021). Benefits, Motivations, and Challenges of International Collaborative Research: A Sociology of Science Case Study, cience and Public Policy, 48(2), 235–245, https://doi-org.kuleuven.e-bronnen.be/10.1093/scipol/scab010
Ellis C., & Bochner A. P. (2006). Analyzing analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35, 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449
Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2010). Autoethnography: An Overview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1589
Ellison, A. M., & Borden, D. B. (2022). Constructive Friction Creates a Third Space for Art/science Collaborations. Leonardo 2022; 55 (3): 283–288. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_02200
Engelen, L., Rahmann, M., & de Jong, E. (2022). Design for healthy ageing – the relationship between design, well-being. Building Research and Information, 50(21),1–17 https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2021.1984867
Gunn, W., Otto, T., & Smith, R. (Eds.) (2013). Design Anthropology: Theory and Practice. Bloomsburry.
Hansson, B. (1999). Interdisciplinarity: for what purpose? Policy Sciences, 32(4), pp. 339–43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4532474
Klein, E. (2021). Unpaid care, welfare conditionality and expropriation. Gender Work Organ, 28: 1475-1489. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12679
Lee, S., Coughlin, J. F., Balmuth, A., Lee, C., Cerino, L., Yang, M., Klopfer, E., de Weck, O. L., & Ochsendorf, J. (2023) Designing Longevity Planning Blocks through experimental participatory observation and interviews. In D. De Sainz Molestina, L. Galluzzo, F. Rizzo, D. Spallazzo (Eds.), IASDR 2023: Life-Changing Design, 9-13 October, Milan, Italy. https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2023.172
Lee, S-H., Coughlin, J. F., Hodara, S., Yang, M. C., de Weck, O. L., Klopfer, E., & Ochsendorf, J. (2024) Design for Longevity Literature Review in Product Lifecycle, Financial Planning, and Gerontology. In C. Gray, E. Ciliotta Chehade, P. Hekkert, L. Forlano, P. Ciuccarelli, P. Lloyd (Eds.), DRS2024: Boston, 23–28 June, Boston, USA. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2024.363
Lee, S-H., Yang, M., de Weck, O. L., Lee, C., Coughlin, J. F., Klopfer, E., & Ochsendorf, J. (2023). Service Design in Action: Transformation, Consideration, and System Thinking. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED23), Bordeaux, France, 24-28 July 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/psd.2023.315
Lehrer, J. (2012). Groupthink, The New Yorker. Retrieved April 2024 from: Groupthink | The New Yorker
Manchester, H., & Jarke, J. (2022). Considering the role of material gerontology in reimagining technology design for ageing populations. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 15(2), 181–213. https://doi.org/10.3384/ijal.1652-8670.3531
Marcelino, I., Laza, R., Domingues, P., Gómez-Meire, S., & Pereira, A. (2015). eServices–service platform for pervasive elderly care. In Ambient Intelligence – Software and Applications: 6th International Symposium on Ambient Intelligence (ISAmI 2015) (pp. 203–211). Springer International Publishing.
Merkel, S. & Kucharski, A. (2019). Participatory Design in Gerontechnology: A Systematic Literature Review, Gerontologist 59(1), e16–e25 https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny034
Müller, F. (2021). Design Ethnography: Epistemology and Methodology. Springer Nature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60396-0
Munro, A. J. (2011). Autoethnography as a Research Method in Design Research at Universities. 20/20 Design Vision. Sixth International DEFSA Conference Proceedings, pp. 156–163.
Panagiotidou, G., Poblome, J., Aerts, J., & Vande Moere, A. (2022). Designing a Data Visualisation for Interdisciplinary Scientists. How to Transparently Convey Data Frictions? Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 31(4), 633–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-022-09432-9
Peine, A., Marshall, B., Martin, W., & Neven, L. (2022). Socio-gerontechnology Interdisciplinary Critical Studies of Ageing and Technology. Routledge.
Peine, A., & Neven, L. (2019). From intervention to co-constitution: New directions in theorizing about aging and technology, the Gerontologist, 59 (1), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny050
Poulos, C. N. (2021). Conceptual foundations of autoethnography. In C. N. Poulos, Essentials of autoethnography (pp. 3–17). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000222-001
Rivero, A. M. (2018). Aging suit: An accessible and low-cost design tool for the gerontodesign. In Handbook of Research on Ergonomics and Product Design (pp. 56–69). IGI Global.
Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Temple Smith.
Schouwenberg, L. & Kaethler, M. (eds.) (2021). The auto-ethnographic turn in Design. Valiz.
Soto, M., Xue, H., & Tsekleves, E. (2022). Design for balance: Wellness and Health. Base Diseño e Innovación, 7(6):4-11. https://doi.org/10.52611/bdi.num6.2022.786
Specht, A. & Crowston, K. (2022). Interdisciplinary collaboration from diverse science teams can produce significant outcomes. PLoS ONE, 17 (11): e0278043. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278043
Suchman, L. (2011). Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 40: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.041608.105640
The Design Council (2004). Framework for Innovation. Retrieved from: https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/framework-for-innovation/ on 15 sept. 2024
World Health Organisation (2022). Retrieved in January 2024 from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health.
Wright, E. (2004). Designing for an ageing population: An inclusive design methodology. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 2 (3), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.2.3.155/0
Wall, S. (2016). Toward a Moderate Autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916674966