
doi: 10.1109/re.2008.63
For several decades there has been a debate in the computing sciences about the relative roles of design and empirical research, and about the contribution of design and research methodology to the relevance of research results. In this minitutorial we review this debate and compare it with evidence about the relation between design and research in the history of science and technology. Our review shows that research and design are separate but concurrent activities, and that relevance of research results depends on problem setting rather than on rigorous methods. We argue that rigorous scientific methods separate design from research, and we give simple model for how to do this in a problem-driven way.
METIS-249634, EWI-13460, IS-Design science methodology, SCS-Services, IR-64987
METIS-249634, EWI-13460, IS-Design science methodology, SCS-Services, IR-64987
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
