Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m Dating maintenance tags: {{Citation needed}} |
||
Line 5:
Recent research suggests that designers create more innovative concepts and ideas when working within a co-design environment with others than they do when creating ideas on their own.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mitchell|first1=Val|last2=Ross|first2=Tracy|last3=Sims|first3=Ruth|last4=Parker|first4=Christopher J.|title=Empirical investigation of the impact of using co-design methods when generating proposals for sustainable travel solutions|journal=CoDesign|date=2015|volume=12|issue=4|pages=205–220|doi=10.1080/15710882.2015.1091894|url=https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/18877|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1177/1094670517714060|title = The Value of Codesign|year = 2018|last1 = Trischler|first1 = Jakob|last2 = Pervan|first2 = Simon J.|last3 = Kelly|first3 = Stephen J.|last4 = Scott|first4 = Don R.|journal = Journal of Service Research|volume = 21|pages = 75–100|doi-access = free}}</ref>
Participatory design has been used in many settings and at various scales. For some, this approach has a political dimension of user empowerment and democratization. For others, it is seen as a way of abrogating design responsibility and innovation by designers{{Citation needed|date=July 2020}}.
In several [[Scandinavian countries]], during the 1960s and 1970s, participatory design was rooted in work with trade unions; its ancestry also includes [[action research]] and [[Sociotechnical system|sociotechnical design]].<ref>[http://cpsr.org/issues/pd/ Web Page on Participatory Design] on the site of [[Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility|CPSR]]. Retrieved 13 April 2006.</ref>
| |||