Difference between revisions of "Lundmark-Lymer2016"
BurakTekin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Sofia Lundmark; Gustav Lymer |Title=Analogies in interaction: practical reasoning and participatory design |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation an...") |
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis" to "Conversation Analysis") |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Sofia Lundmark; Gustav Lymer | |Author(s)=Sofia Lundmark; Gustav Lymer | ||
|Title=Analogies in interaction: practical reasoning and participatory design | |Title=Analogies in interaction: practical reasoning and participatory design | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Ethnomethodology; participatory design; reasoning; |
|Key=Lundmark-Lymer2016 | |Key=Lundmark-Lymer2016 | ||
|Year=2016 | |Year=2016 | ||
Revision as of 03:39, 16 May 2018
| Lundmark-Lymer2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Lundmark-Lymer2016 |
| Author(s) | Sofia Lundmark, Gustav Lymer |
| Title | Analogies in interaction: practical reasoning and participatory design |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Ethnomethodology, participatory design, reasoning |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Text & Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies |
| Volume | 36 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 705-731 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/text-2016-0031 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The present study examines a set of discussions among professional counselors in the area of youth counseling, as they participate in the development and design of an online video-mediated communication platform. With an overarching interest in how participatory design is performed through conversations, the analysis focuses on analogical reasoning through which the envisaged system is anchored to existing technologies and work practices. Three forms of analogical reasoning are identified: formulating design alternatives; challenging problem formulations; and telling stories. In various ways, these forms of analogical reasoning inform the ongoing design decision-making process, where the hypothetical technology and its organizational and work-related implications are evaluated. The study contributes to how analogical reasoning is done in interaction, and places the findings in the context of participatory design and studies of design reasoning.
Notes
