The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Taking things apart: reaching common ground and shared material understanding
Abstract
In this note we discuss and argue about how taking things apart and disassembling can be meaningful practices in explorative design projects. In particular, we report on an explorative design exercise about taking apart an unfamiliar device. Relating to this design situation, we provide accounts for how collaborative hands-on experience can support reaching common ground and acquiring shared material understanding in an interdisciplinary design team through establishing a material brief. In the end we reflect and discuss how this may complement our practices regarding materials and interaction design.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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 citing paper
“However, the already acknowledged problems characterizing multi-, inter- and transdisciplinary research and practice, such as mismatches in goals, assumptions, practices, and understandings (cf. Adamczyk and Twidale, 2007; Murer et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2013) pictured also in our work, even if those did not turn out to be critical issues hindering our project.”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Murer et al., 2014
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kinnula, M., Iivari, N., Kuure, L., & Molin-Juustila, T. (2023) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-023-09473-8 · Cited by 6
“…inter-and transdisciplinary research and practice, such as mismatches in goals, assumptions, practices, and understandings (cf. Adamczyk and Twidale, 2007; Murer et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2013) pictured also in our work, even if those did not turn out to be critical issues hindering our project.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Murer, M., Jacobsson, M., Skillgate, S., & Sundström, P.
- Affiliations
- Stockholm University (SE)
- Lund University (SE)
- ORCID
- Murer, Martin
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2014-04-26
- Pages
- 469-472
- OpenAlex
- W2059338604
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 3.80
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Österreichische Nationalstiftung für Forschung, Technologie und Entwicklung
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Social Sciences › Education › Engineering Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- interdisciplinary design teams, design practice
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
