Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/27243
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRieger, Janice-
dc.contributor.authorHERSSENS, Jasmien-
dc.contributor.authorSTRICKFADEN, Megan-
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-26T13:35:22Z-
dc.date.available2018-10-26T13:35:22Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationCoDesign (Print), 16 (2), p. 135-151-
dc.identifier.issn1571-0882-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/27243-
dc.description.abstractThis paper reflects on multisensorial and multimodal processes by considering spatial design differently through three case studies in Canada and Belgium that involved persons with visual impairments. Our research provokes alternative ways of ‘seeing’ and ‘being’ in the world and we assert that the normative ways that designers think, act, and design for/with people who have disabilities can be shifted when considering ableism and techné together. Our studies and methods differ from other design processes and methods, in that we situate design within an understanding of ableism and techné, where we encourage designers to reflect upon their ability biases in order to break assumptions about the abilities and disabilities of users and/or codesigners. Through exploring, observing and creating, nuanced examinations into ability and techné are revealed that support an intimate bond and an empathic response towards shaping the designers’ understanding of participants embodied and practical knowledge. Our case study research expands the ways of knowing and doing in codesign through ableism and techné with people who are visually impaired, to create inspiring and meaningful designs through multisensorial processes that are inclusive of ‘seeing’ in order to spatialise differently.-
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by the Killam Trusts [Cornerstone Grant]; Institute for the Promotion of Innovation through Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT-Vlaanderen/ FWO Flanders) [Grant]; Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [Doctoral Fellowship].-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherTAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD-
dc.subject.otherAbleism-
dc.subject.otherdisability-
dc.subject.otherphotovoice-
dc.subject.othermultisensorial-
dc.subject.othertechne-
dc.subject.otherspatial design-
dc.titleSpatialising differently through ability and techné-
dc.typeJournal Contribution-
dc.identifier.epage151-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage135-
dc.identifier.volume16-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatA1-
local.publisher.place2-4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OR14 4RN, OXON, ENGLAND-
dc.relation.referencesReferences Anderson, J. 2004. “Talking Whilst Walking: A Geographical Archaeology of Knowledge.” Area 36 (3): 254–261. doi:10.1111/area.2004.36.issue-3. Baxter, P., and S. Jack. 2008. “Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers.” The Qualitative Report 13 (4): 544–559. Bezemer, J., and D. Mavers. 2011. “Multimodal Transcription as Academic Practice: A Social Semiotic Perspective.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 14 (3): 191–206. doi:10.1080/13645579.2011.563616. Butler, J. 2005. Giving an Account of Oneself. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Candlin, F. 2006. “The Dubious Inheritance of Touch: Art History and Museum Access.” Journal of Visual Culture 5 (2): 137–154. doi:10.1177/1470412906066906. Chouinard, V. 1997. “Making Space for Disabling Difference: Challenges Ableist Geographies.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 15: 379–387. doi:10.1068/d150379. Cober, R., O. Au, and J. J. Son, 2012. “Using a Participatory Approach to Design a Technology- Enhanced Museum Tour for VisitorsWho are Blind.” In Proceedings of the 2012 iConference, 592– 594. New York: ACM. Devlieger, P., and M. Strickfaden. 2012. “Reversing the {Im}Material Sense of a Non-Place: The Impact of Blindness on the Brussels Metro.” Space & Culture 15 (3): 224–238. doi:10.1177/ 1206331212445951. CODESIGN 15 Dicks, B., B. Soyinka, and A. Coffey. 2006. “Multimodal Ethnography.” Qualitative Research 6 (1): 77–96. doi:10.1177/1468794106058876. Flyvbjerg, B. 2001. Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge: University Press. Geiser, T. 2008. “Embodiment, Emotion and Empathy: A Phenomenological Approach to Apprenticeship Learning.” Anthropological Theory 8: 299–318. doi:10.1177/1463499608093816. Gibson, J. J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Herssens, J. 2011. Designing Architecture for More: A Framework of Haptic Design Parameters. Hasselt/Leuven: UHasselt, KULeuven, LULU Publishers. Herssens, J., and A. Heylighen. 2012. “Blind Photographers: An (Im)Material Quest into the Spatial Experience of Blind Children.” Children, Youth and Environments 22 (1): 99–124. Hickey-Moody, A., and V. Crowley. 2010. “Disability Matters: Pedagogy, Media and Affect.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 31 (4): 399–409. Ingold, T. 2011. Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. Routledge: New York. Jackson, M. 1998. Minima Ethnographica: Intersubjectivity and the Anthropological Project. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kuber, R., W. Yu, and G. McAllister. 2007. “Towards Developing Assistive Haptic Feedback for Visually Impaired Internet Users”. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems,1525–1534. New York: ACM. McRuer, R. 2002. “Compulsory Able-Bodiedness and Queer/Disabled Existence.” In Disability Studies: Enabling the Humanities, edited by S. Snyder, B. Brueggemann, and R. Garland- Thomson, 369–380. New York: Modern Language Association. Metatla, O., N. Bryan-Kinns, T. Stockman, and F. Martin. 2015. “Designing with and for People Living with Visual Impairments: Audio-Tactile Mock-Ups, Audio Diaries and Participatory Prototyping.” CoDesign 11 (1): 35–48. doi:10.1080/15710882.2015.1007877. Omansky, B. 2011. Borderlands of Blindness. Boulder: Lynne Reinner Publisher. Pink, S. 2011. “Multimodality, Multisensoriality and Ethnographic Knowing: Social Semiotics and the Phenomenology of Perception.” Qualitative Research 11 (1): 261–276. doi:10.1177/ 1468794111399835. Rieger, J. 2016. “Doing Dis/Ordered Mapping/S: Embodying Disability in the Museum Environment.” Doctoral Dissertation., University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Rieger, J., and M. Strickfaden. 2016. “Taken for Granted: The Material Relations between Disability and Codes/Guidelines.” Societies 6: 1-11. Switzerland: MDPI. Ruiz, A., and M. Strickfaden. 2015. “Spatial Explorations and Digital Traces: Experiences of Legal Blindness through Filmmaking.” Societies 5: 1–19. Switzerland: MDPI. Ruiz, A., and M. Strickfaden. 2016. “Light in the Borderlands: A Film Created by Three Legally Blind Urban Explorers.” In Rethinking Disability: World Perspectives in Culture and Society, edited by P. Devlieger, S. E. Brown, B. Miranda- Galarza, and M. Strickfaden, 317–329. Antwerpen: Garant Publishers. Salgado, M., and A. Botero. 2008. “Opening Exhibitions: The Visually Impaired and the Design of Probes Packages.” Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design 2008, 150–153. Bloomington: Indiana University. Sterne, J. 2005. “Communication as Techne.” In Communication As. . .: Perspectives on Theory, edited by G. J. Shepard, J. St. John, and Striphas, 90–98. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Strickfaden, M. 2016. “In Focus: Blind Photographers Challenge Visual Expectations.” In Rethinking Disability:World Perspectives in Culture and Society, edited by P.Devlieger, S. E. Brown, B.Miranda- Galarza, and M. Strickfaden, 149–163. Antwerpen Belgium: Garant Publishers. Strickfaden, M. n.d. Light in The Borderlands. Film. https://meganstrickfaden.com/Film. Accessed Oct 10, 2018. Strickfaden, M., and P. Devlieger. 2011a. “The Brussels Metro: Accessibility through Co- Creation.” International Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 105: 638–647. Strickfaden, M., and P. Devlieger. 2011b. “Empathy through Accumulating Techné: Designing an Accessible Metro.” The Design Journal 14: 207–230. doi:10.2752/175630611X12984592780041. 16 J. RIEGER ET AL. Williams, W., and J. Rieger. 2015. “A Design History of Design: Complexity, Criticality, and Cultural Competence.” RACAR: Revue D’art Canadienne/Canadian Art Review 40 (2): 15–21. Wilson, S., A. Roper, J. Marshall, J. Galliers, N. Devane, T. Booth, and C. Woolf. 2015. “Codesign for People with Aphasia through Tangible Design Languages.” CoDesign 11 (1): 21–34. doi:10.1080/15710882.2014.997744. Wolbring, G. 2008a. “The Politics of Ableism.” Development 51 (2): 252–258. doi:10.1057/dev.2008.17. Wolbring, G. 2014. “Ability Privilege: A Needed Addition to Privilege Studies.” In Journal for Critical Animal Studies 12 (2): 118–141. Yin, R. K. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.-
local.type.refereedRefereed-
local.type.specifiedArticle-
dc.source.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/15710882.2018.1531134-
dc.identifier.isi000535137200003-
dc.identifier.eissn1745-3755-
local.provider.typeWeb of Science-
local.uhasselt.uhpubyes-
local.uhasselt.internationalno-
item.fullcitationRieger, Janice; HERSSENS, Jasmien & STRICKFADEN, Megan (2020) Spatialising differently through ability and techné. In: CoDesign (Print), 16 (2), p. 135-151.-
item.contributorRieger, Janice-
item.contributorHERSSENS, Jasmien-
item.contributorSTRICKFADEN, Megan-
item.validationecoom 2021-
item.accessRightsOpen Access-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
crisitem.journal.issn1571-0882-
crisitem.journal.eissn1745-3755-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Spatialising differently through ability and techn.pdf
  Restricted Access
Published version1.91 MBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Codesign_Spatialising Differently through Ability and Technė.pdfPeer-reviewed author version371.12 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

2
checked on Sep 3, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

3
checked on Sep 21, 2024

Page view(s)

134
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Download(s)

138
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.