PhD - Industriell design, NTNU - Industriell design (PHDESIG)
Primærkontakt for doktorgradsstudiet i industriell design er Institutt for design.
Forskningsaktiviteten ved instituttet er sterkt knyttet til doktorgrads-utdanningen.
Designteori og andre temaer
Følgende har disputert:
Følgende har disputert:
28. august forsvarte Faheem Ali sin doktorgradsavhandling:
”Exploring the role of company context for informing Design for Sustainability implementation”
Companies are increasingly taking on a sustainability journey in their operations. Design for Sustainability (DfS) has been one such prominent response from companies to address the challenges of sustainability. The thesis uses insights from seven case companies in Norway and Denmark to understand the different contextual elements in a DfS implementation scenario. The thesis further adds on to the academic discourse on DfS by presenting insights from five different adjacent fields of study and how it can contribute to DfS implementation. The main audience of this thesis are DfS researchers and management consultants working with sustainability implementation in companies.
Casper Boks (prof.), Institutt for design
Niki Bey (førsteam.) Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
Disputas Anne Carlijn Vis
Anne Carlijn Vis forsvarte sin doktorgradsavhandling 3. desember 2018:
”Matching Intentions with Experience – a Human-Centered Service Design Approach to Shared Decision Making ”
Disputas Martha Skogen
6. juni 2017 forsvarte Martha Skogen sin doktoravhandling:
"Do You See What I See? Investigations into the Underlying Parameters of Visual Simplicity"
Motivated by a longstanding interest in timeless design, this research focused on visual simplicity due to its potential as a core value of a design’s longevity. Multiple studies were conducted to investigate how people view, interpret, and understand visual stimuli, with simplicity as a fundamental aesthetic approach. The research goal was to uncover what the underlying components of visual simplicity may be, and how people judge those components. The research into visual simplicity is rooted in the following questions:I. What is visual simplicity and what are the graphic design parameters that determine it? II. How do people interpret visual simplicity? III. Does everyone agree? The range of visual stimuli tested here included aspects of the real world as well as the computer realm. The stimuli included (in order): CD covers, architecture and/or public spaces, miniaturized poster art, graphical user interface (‘GUI’) screen layouts and GUI icons. The initial studies included adult participants only. Results revealed a consistency in responses: In both the real world and GUI realms, adults answered consistently that “simple” design meant a scant amount of detail and minimal use of line, color, and other graphic design parameters— whereas “complicated” visual design meant the opposite. For adults, there seemed to be a reliable set of design parameters that when combined, elicited a “simple” or “complicated” response to a visual design, regardless of media. However, the final set of studies revealed an unforeseen phenomenon: youths ( ≤ age 13) did not respond consistently with adults. In general, youths did not consistently associate detail-scant GUI icons with simplicity, but in many cases with being more complicated. This revealed a possibility that people go through a period of transition during which they change their interpretations of minimalized, abstracted imagery and then associate those characteristics with being “simple”. This phenomenon led to a discussion regarding the potential existence of ‘visual archetypes’ and how they might be interpreted by viewers of various ages. ‘Visual archetypes’ refer to a design that uses the least amount of visual information required to communicate the message. The contributions of this doctoral research include:
• expanded awareness of design parameters that are associated with the relationship between visual Simplicity-Complicated
• insight into the emotional aspects connected with visual Simplicity-Complicated
• awareness that not all viewers interpret Simplicity-Complicated identically (age-based differences were revealed—there may be other differences)
• recognition of the possibility for unintentional design presumptions
• discussion of visual archetypes
This research contributes to the design community by demonstrating that people can interpret design differently than designers might presume and/or intend. Although the research raises awareness of potential interpretive differences between children and (primarily) midlife adults, the discussion can perhaps apply to seniors as well. Importantly, the research revealed that children are highly capable interpreters of our culturally- and computer-based visual information.