Show simple item record

Evaluating Approaches to Participation in Design: The Participants' Perspective.

dc.contributor.authorPhalen, Kimberly Bosworthen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-15T17:10:37Z
dc.date.availableNO_RESTRICTIONen_US
dc.date.available2011-09-15T17:10:37Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.submitteden_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86328
dc.description.abstractLandscape architects and other designers rely on users for feedback about their needs, concerns, and reactions to potential solutions. While these well-intended efforts often fail to meet their goals, evaluations of the effectiveness of design participation from the participants’ perspective is lacking. Drawing on the Reasonable Person Model as a conceptual framework, the three studies reported here evaluated participants’ understanding of design options, engagement, and sense of meaningful participation. The first two studies, in the context of a design project for nature trails at a medical campus in Midwest U.S., used design sessions and a photoquestionnaire. The third study followed a more systematic approach to compare the effectiveness of different types of design drawings. Participants found the design sessions engaging and their input meaningful. However, the differences in understandability for the different designs are attributable to presentation format, organization, and design graphics. Furthermore, the more difficulty participants had understanding the design presentation, the less they liked the design option presented. This study also found that the photoquestionnaire compared favorably to the design presentations. The photoquestionnaire, the focus of the second study, showed that this approach performed particularly well in promoting a sense of meaningful participation for the participating visitors and employees. It also revealed the importance of offering multiple avenues for people to express their concerns so they feel that they have been heard. The third study found photorealistic and perspective drawings to be more understandable and engaging and to promote greater confidence in discussing the design than plans and sections. Notably, some plans and sections, characterized as simple, neat, coherent, legible, and using colors that matched common perceptions, performed better than some photorealistic and perspective drawings. Simplification in the representation of design features also enhanced understandability in some cases. This research reveals ways designers can facilitate a participation process that meets the cognitive and psychological needs of participants and leads to reliable, useful feedback. It empowers designers by helping them see they can make a difference in creating an effective participation process.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectVisualizationen_US
dc.subjectPublic Participationen_US
dc.subjectExpertiseen_US
dc.subjectDesign Drawingen_US
dc.subjectPhoto Surveyen_US
dc.subjectEnvironmental Psychologyen_US
dc.titleEvaluating Approaches to Participation in Design: The Participants' Perspective.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreenamePhDen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplineNatural Resources and Environmenten_US
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantorUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studiesen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberKaplan, Rachelen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberDe Young, Raymond K.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberGrese, Robert E.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberKaplan, Stephenen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelArchitectureen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLandscape Architectureen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelCommunicationsen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPsychologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelArtsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86328/1/bosworth_1.pdf
dc.owningcollnameDissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.