
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>doi: 10.2307/1511844
When Design Research began, say in the 1960s, the eventual success of science was assumed. Already, at the notorious 1956 Oxford Conference, architectural education in the UK (and its sphere of influence) accepted architecture was a second class subject: ie not properly scientific. Science (in actuality, technology) was seen as so successful that everything should be scientific: the philosopher’s stone! Architects (a significant subdivision of designers) were determined to become scientific. The syllabus was changed and design science was invented. Even the Architectural Association School gave over a third of undergraduate time to design science. Prime Minister Wilson and his Government declared the “White Heat of the Technological Revolution.”
| citations 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). | 101 | |
| 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. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
