In a project dedicated to researching transitional spaces through two lenses, we where asked to study a chosen space through (1) scientific and (2) ethnographic methods. Below you will find a walkthrough of the first section of the project; research rooted in the scientific tradition.
1.1 The research group
The group consisted of a group of 6 students who together was asked to identify a transition space and thereafter split into two sub-ggroups. Before doing so, we where also asked to discuss the methods which we where going to use in each sub-group — this was done so that there was a range of methods used. In this way we could see the groups’ different takes on the space through the usage of different methods.
1.2 Choosing space and methods
Before meeting with the group of 6 students I used book ”Universal Methods of Design” (Martin & Hanington, 2012) to try to find methods that would fit in to the description of traditional scientific methods. I found the task quite hard, due to the inclusive methods used in the book. In the case of this assignment it was bad news for me, but in general it is something to celebrate of course.
Images from initial notes on methods
I chose to suggest the methods ”Grafitti Wall”, a distant version of ”Participant Observation” and ”Observation” to the group. I chose the methods based on what I found most distancing the researcher from involvement with the research objects the most, but that at the same time allowed for systematic recording of the environment, people, behaviors, objects and events.
When the large group of 6 students met we started by discussing three spaces of interest; (1) Starbucks Coffeshop on the Georgia Tech Campus, (2) space within elevators or space around elevators and (3) Mural walls. The two latter where my ideas. The idea around the murals was connected directly to a the Outerspace Project 2018 where murals where being created all over Atlanta by artists. I was interested in seeing how people interacted and/or behaved around the creation of these walls. I also found it interesting to look at older murals in the city to see movements around these. The idea of the murals was voted down by the group due to its time constraints. The elevator and Starbucks idea where then looked at in more detail. We chose to go with Starbucks since we found the cons on the elevator space to be to great (invading space of others, not being able to record or document movements, affecting the people within the space too much etc.)
After choosing our transitional space; the Starbucks coffee shop at campus (a transitional space for students and their various motivations for entering that space) we went on to deciding which methods to use. Some of the students pitched their suggested methods and from deciding on the first ones we preferred working on, groups emerged. The following image shows the suggested methods.
2. Methods used
2.1 Participatory Observation and Observation
My sub-group decided to go with the Marginal Participatory Observation where we blended in with the environment ”as a natural observer of an activity” (Martin & Hanington, 2012: p. 124).
The method allowed for us to put ourselves in the same environment we where about to do research on. Experiencing the space helped us immerse ourselves with the environment (sounds, interior design, furniture etc) while doing the research.
The Observation method, similar to Participatory Observation allowed us as researchers to attentively look at the objects within our space, people, their behaviours, design of objects such as tables and chairs etc.
Through our observing we had systematic observation data of the space and objects and people within in. As we did the research, a theme of multitasking appeared to us which we decided to further investigate by focusing our methods to it.
As the project’s focus got shifted and multitasking became a central focus, some of the group members suggested a shift also in methods. As the initial idea of Graffiti Wall (set up for people to write down their thoughts on the space) was shown to be ineffective (the staff would not let us have it set up in the space), we started doing a systematic mapping of behaviors connected to specific sections of the space. We marked out the sections with numbers and divided these amongst ourselves to observe. Each group member observed a person by a specific table in a section for 10 minutes which resulted in the following mapping of behaviors.
2.2.1 Result of behavioral mapping
The results of the detailed mapping showed us an overview over the tasks of each table and person under observation. This in combination with the ergonmic analysis gives us further investigation points; for instace does the fact that some tables size are smaller than others have an impact on the results of acitivities?
2.3 Ergonomic Analysis
As part of the result of the observational analysis, Ergonomic Analysis became a building block to understanding the space of our research. The various seating designs and arrangements was recorded and presented according to the image below.
2.3.1 Initial floor sketch
It is quite evident how the use of the scientific methods can be used in ones advantage within any project. With an openness and systematic tools of observation and recording I would indeed use these methods for instance to get basic information about for instance a space of reserach. I would of course use the ”findings” to further go in to depth and invite the people within the space to test hypothesis lifted during my my initial research. This is what my group has done in the second part of the project where we use (ethnographic methods).
References Hanington, B., & Martin, B. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Rockport Publishers.