Cited by 44Design Education and PracticePolitical Philosophy and EthicsUsability and User Interface Design

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Just design

Open access
Bianchin, Matteo, Heylighen, Ann·2018·Design Studies

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.destud.2017.10.001

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the product design world there is a strong emphasis on the process of design rather than the output.

    “In the product design world there is a strong emphasis on the process of design rather than the output [36].”

    From Inclusion, diversity, equity and accessibility in the built environment: A study of architectural design practice (2021) · cites this paper as [36]

    Section 2.3, “A way out of the paradox” (page unavailable), shifts the definition of universal and inclusive design from output to process. But this is the authors’ proposed approach, not a finding that the product design field generally places strong emphasis on process over output; Section 2.2 also describes an output-oriented approach. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Crilly, 2008, Representing artefacts as media, International Journal of Design, 2, 15
  2. Pullin, 2007, Focusing on Extra-ordinary Users. Universal Access in Human Computer Interaction, Vol. 4554, 253
  3. Sen, 1980, Equality of what?, Vol. 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bianchin, M., & Heylighen, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Milano-Bicocca (IT)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Heylighen, Ann
Venue
Design Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
54
Pages
1-22
ISSN
0142-694X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4249430320
Cited by
44
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Design Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
  • Cineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University) (submittedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Research Fund KU Leuven (SF/16/005)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
inclusive design, justice as fairness, John Rawls, design ethics, human diversity, design process

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review