首页> 外文会议>Conference on Participatory design >Participation, power, critique
【24h】

Participation, power, critique

机译:参与,权力,批评

获取原文

摘要

This paper examines the scope of participatory design on the basis of the case of a national standard for electronic patient records (EPR) in Denmark. The relationship between participatory methods and techniques on the one hand and critical and emancipatory aims on the other is discussed within the framework of participatory design. Some argue that participation in itself entails striving towards democracy; others argue that the tendency to focus upon tools, techniques and the arena of single projects should be supplemented by emancipatory aims such as technology assessment and a critique of dominance. These issues are discussed through the controversies surrounding the test of a prototype application based on BEHR in late 2004, a standard for EPRs (Basic Structure for Electronic Health Records). I argue that participation is valuable, but that the scope of participatory design should also include critical conceptualizations of participation, power, methodology and knowledge. Finally, standards can be crucial cases to examine for participatory design, since they affect the work of many people and call for a focus on arenas beyond the single design project.
机译:本文以丹麦的一项电子病历国家标准(EPR)为例,研究了参与式设计的范围。在参与式设计的框架内,一方面讨论了参与式方法和技术与另一方面的批判性和解放性目标之间的关系。有些人认为,参与本身就意味着要努力走向民主。其他人则认为,集中于工具,技术和单个项目领域的趋势应辅之以解放性的目标,例如技术评估和对优势的批判。通过围绕2004年末基于BEHR(EPR(电子病历的基本结构)的标准)的原型应用程序的测试所引起的争议来讨论这些问题。我认为参与是有价值的,但参与设计的范围也应包括对参与,权力,方法论和知识的批判性概念化。最后,标准可能是检查参与式设计的关键案例,因为它们会影响许多人的工作,并要求将重点放在单个设计项目之外的领域。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号