Critical Design and the creation of alternative visions

Literally and metaphorically

Staying with trouble

After the workshop, we decided to keep the conversation going using this website as a platform. During the workshop the difficulty to summarize a day full of conversations, debates and work became obvious. We are continuing the story, just in another way than first decided.

The list below is just a starting point for expanding the narratives of critical design. Feel free to fill in with short stories related to the themes, concepts and observations mentioned at this website. Start with the list below. Illustrations and explanations of the different themes that emerged during the conference will be published in August.

Share your experiences working as a critical designer or your reflections or critique towards it. Share by sending/linking us a short video (30-60 sec) or a narrative with pictures and text (1-5 pictures). State the concept(s) it is related to below. Together, we will open the black box of critical design.

Welcome and join us with your story!

Submit your stories below or to our e-mailadress:

• Site
• Position
• Sensibility
• Language
• Balance
• Embrace messiness
• Communication
• Alternatives
• Cut
• Frames/Rules
• Emotions
• Uncomfortable
• Embodiment

The title "Staying with trouble" originates from the submission made by Naushin Malik and Anna Croon Fors

/The Participants at the Critical Design workshop @ DRS’14

Send additional material (pictures, movies etc.) to

Before the workshop

Before the workshop: creation of alternative visions

“…reflection is not a purely cognitive activity, but is folded into all our ways of seeing and experiencing the world.” (Sengers et al., 2005:50).

In order to enable, create and share alternative visions, a pre-workshop activity is planned. With support of digital storytelling (Rossiter & Garcia, 2010) the workshop participants will document and collect their proposals and tentative understandings, study and usage of critical design in their own profession. Digital storytelling consists of still images, video, texts and aural elements, not necessarily containing them all (Rossiter & Garcia, 2010). The combinations of elements depend on the story being told, whether it enhances or distract from the story. Using digital storytelling, everyday people can with easy means, share life stories and events.

Digital storytelling support a creation of materials in both literal and metaphorical ways. It speaks to awareness of self and reflections on life (Rossiter & Garcia, 2010). Through digital storytelling, our participants can identify, express and share their conscious and unconscious assumptions of not only critical design as such, but also themselves as professionals. A concept that is useful in order to inform the narrative related to identity which partly is in focus for this workshop, is the concept of positioning. Or as Davies and Harré (1990:48) once defined it: “ the discursive process whereby selves are located in conversations as observably and subjectively coherent participants in jointly produced story lines.” (Davis, Harré, 1990; De Fina & Georgakopoulou, 2012).

When you tell a story about yourself, you pick certain aspects of life experiences, such as your experience as a designer, researcher or practitioner. These aspects are selected, organized and highlighted as important and meaningful in relation to other aspects. The selected aspects are given special importance and relevance, and contribute to meaning making around a special positioning. This choice of representation allows the narrator to present a storied self (a scientist, a storyteller, a critical designer and so on) in relation to different positions. Roles and variations are converted into symbols that represent different modes in a persons identity positioning. These symbols in turn acts only within the confines of a particular story and can thus be seen as actors.

Trying to discern, identify, and analyze this type of symbols and their significance for a certain positioning through a critical design perspective, may be a way to understand how the symbols have an active role in the production of meaning about you as a professional. It also brings to the fore how identity positions are not stable but fluid and thus also possible to modify in order to support an alternative way of seeing, which is in line with the ultimate goal of critical design: to create provocation and alteration of taken for granted assumptions. (Law & Mol, 2000).

Accepted submissions

Enhancing critical reflection among professionals and practitioners by using a tangible dialogic reflection tool

Pernille Viktoria K. Andersen, PhD Student
Aalborg University


The UserTEC project (, which supports my PhD, is one of many research projects aiming to design future Home Energy Management Systems (HEMS) that better meet users local sense making and future needs. A case we deal with in this project is how to make implicit assumptions about users and use explicit among different stakeholders (designers, engineers and developers), to create alternative visions for the future design of energy efficient building technologies. The question here is how to engage stakeholders in critical conversations, as a way to question taking for granted assumptions about users and use derived from different professions, different knowledge schemes and different discourses. I’m interested in discussing how we can support critical reflection among professionals and practitioners by presenting a newly developed tangible dialogic reflection tool.

The dialogic tool has been created with inspiration from the field of Participatory Design, and developed based on research about the stakeholders contradicting perspectives on users and use in design of HEMS. The tool works with three different mediation forms all meant to support dialogue and critical reflection; 1) stories/narratives representing complementary positions inspired by the stakeholders current voices, perspectives and perceived dilemmas about users and use, 2) colour coded bricks and a game board, meant as a visual scaffold for writing down and retain main arguments, 3) a value proposition 3D-tower meant for prioritizing and negotiating meanings and perspectives. These different mediation forms has been used in a didactic setup to create provocation and alteration of taken for granted and implicit assumptions, and help create alternative future visions for design of HEMS. Through the use of the tool it is claimed that the stakeholders challenge their current knowledge (meanings, values and memory of past and present), while at the same time allowing them to think critically about possible futures (future use, future needs and the consequences hereof).

Digital story

I plan to create and document my digital story by using still pictures of how the dialogic tool was used in a UserTEC workshop. The pictures will be presented together with narrated stories for each picture. The goal is to narrate a story that shows how critical reflection unfolds among practitioners and professionals using the tangible dialogic reflection tool, to identify what specific qualities a tangible tool must hold in order to support critical reflection. The question raised would be, if the dialogic reflection tool can claim to scaffold critical reflection among practitioners and professionals? My assumption, which I am going to investigate further in my PhD project, is that inherent in course of the playful process, between doing and talking, is tacit knowledge and basic values unveiled accompanied by visual images (represented by the tangible tool and the different colour coded bricks and their position in the value proposition tower) which creates a tangible base for negotiation, critical reflection and alternative visions. These alternative visions will later be developed and used to construct a toolbox for stakeholders developing HEMS, providing knowledge about dilemmas, values and critical scenarios.

Design for debate, the case of telepresence

Max Mollon, PhD Student
SACRe PSL, EnsadLab, Telecom ParisTech

The practice and study of critical design is the topic of my ongoing PhD research, entitled: Design for debate, the case of telepresence. I will present a paper at DRS on this topic: “The rhetoric of design for debate, triggering conversation with an ‘uncanny enough’ artefact”. I began working with this approach in 2011 as a masters student under J. Auger supervision – a colleague from A. Dunne at RCA. I should be able to soon apply critical design outside the university context with an industrial partner – Cisco Systems – for my next design project. In our research, we use design as a tool for public & professional engagement, a mean to stimulate discussion about the value and impact of new technologies which reshapes the way we interact with each other despite distance. We propose an analysis of how to make a “reaction provoking” artefact and then, how to articulate a meaningful discussion. We argue that design is an appropriate mean for debate generation because designers are semiotics specialists when it comes to embodying messages into artefacts. We use the contemporary topic of telepresence as a pretext to reflect on the methodology of this form of “design exploration research” (Fallman 2008) – Abstract of the DRS2014 paper available on demand. I am highly motivated to join your workshop as it would be a great opportunity to meet your team, learn more about your approach and meet people interested in – or working with – critical design. More about my projects on my online portfolio: Reference: Fallman, D. (2008). The interaction design research triangle of design practice, design studies, and design exploration. Design Issues, 24(3), 4–18.

I have been interested with narrative strategies as a way to reach people and provoke meaningful reactions with a designed artefact. I am unfamiliar with the concept of positioning but I can imagine how storytelling would be a relevant way to enable people (in this case, professionals) to reflect on the current paradigms of their practice. For this workshop I would create my digital storytelling using an online platform adapted to everyday personal reporting. It is better if it also allows a general overview/browsing of the content. It could be Storyfy, Tumblr, my facebook account (with a restricted audience) – as it shows track of the chronological evolution. I could also add Vines videos or 1 min Youtube videos to document my practice and thinking day by day. As I already planned to blog on the evolution of my study and the making of my next critical design projects, my next projects (maybe with an industrial partner) would be the perfect occasion to start the documentation. As an interaction designer, my projects take different shapes, mediated on different platforms. They usually address a specific topics: the one of intimate telepresence in the home, the painful feeling of absence, etc.

Staying with trouble in critical design

Anna Croon Fors, Associate professor
Umeå University

Naushin Malik, PhD Student
Umeå University

The stance taken in our research is that a new critical sensibility is needed in approaching, understanding and designing digital things. Our research is inspired by Donna Haraway’s idea of “Staying with trouble” as well as designerly ways of dealing with complexities. In our research we explore how people, digital material and food are intertwined in engaging everyday practices. By exploring digital materials and their entanglement in food practices we question and analyse connections between humans and non-humans. As such, our research aims to explore how food interaction practices are being challenged and transformed by digital things. In our argumentation, it is when digital things are performed in practice that we are able to relate past with future, which in our feministic stance is essential in to open up for alternative futures to come. Critical design is in our view one important stance for staying with the troubles of approaching, understanding and designing how people connect with others (humans and non-humans). Based on theories of relational ontologies and agency as co-constituted between human and nonhumans we focus on affirmative strategies for resisting patriarchal, capitalist, industrial, individualist, hierarchical and linear power structures. Our aim is to open up for inquiries of how social connectivity intra-acts with engagement, creativity, knowledge and relationships.
In this workshop we like to question our relationship with food, each other, our bodies, as well as with digital things. During the workshop we like to work on three interrelated but separate stories, composed and decomposed in our ongoing design-oriented field studies targeting food practices and the role of digital things. The common denominators of the stories are that everyday digital food practices enable a re-reading of significant imagined and experienced boundaries. That is, for example humans-non-humans; social-natural; culture-technology; tradition-transcendence. At the workshop we like to use already documented images, excerpts from food diaries, blogs and other social media forums to instigate an inquiry into how digital storytelling and narrative methods might support alternative capacities and sensibilities of non-related and fragmented wholes such as digital food practices. By our participation in the workshop we like to explore if and how digital storytelling can foster and enhance our ability to deal with complexity, messes and troubles that have no clear-cut answers and solutions. Engaging in matters of methodological alternatives when exploring the relationship between food, digital things and engaging practices are, in our view, an emerging as well as a foundational arena for critical design interventions.

Norm-critical design efforts in interaction design

Martin Jonsson, Senior lecturer
Södertörn University/KTH

Sofia Lundmark, PhD Student, Lecturer
Södertörn University/Uppsala university

In our work we use critical design as both theoretical perspectives for analysing interaction design and digital artefacts, as well as in our more practical design work. For example we have used critical design perspectives to study norms in design of healthcare services and online youth counselling, and also developed tools and methods for working with critical design perspectives in practical design work. In our previous work we have discussed how interaction design consisting of technology, interaction, images, sounds and text together may construct meaning, norms and values in design. Using theories from the field of Science and technology studies (STS) we contribute to the emergent critical tradition in the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), where we apply a critical perspective on technology as a co-constructing agent. We have argued that there is a need to unpack how digital design embeds norms and to examine how the relationship between norms and design can be critically examined (Lundmark & Normark, 2012). We have also explored some specific challenges that arise when designing information systems and tools where normative aspects around for example gender, ethnicity, class etc. are important (Lundmark, work-in-progress, Lundmark & Jonsson, 2014 in press). (co-authored with Martin Jonsson)

The digital stories that will be created for the workshop stems from two parallel activities: Firstly we have recently established the twitter and instagram accounts “normkritiskdesign” (Swedish for norm critical design) where we post examples of design that in various ways question existing norms and power structures as well as pointers to literature and other relevant sources of information. Secondly we are starting a group for people in our vicinity interested in critical design research. The focus of the group will be to explore how practical critical design work can inform and contribute to research on interaction design. In the group we will actively perform practical design work with a critical stance. The activities in the group will be continuously recorded using video, images and text and posted on the group’s blog. The twitter and instagram streams together with the blog posts from the group will together form the story that will act as the input to th e workshop.

Changing broadcasting practice

Maria Nordmark, Concept developer

The Swedish Education Broadcasting Company (UR) is about to make a shift from broadcast to become a digital thinking and digital producing media company. In front of this conversion is the project "The Youth Channel". In order to examine how a “digital first” perspective can affect the production on different levels - such as internal systems, working processes, decision making and professional skills - we use the method of critical design.

One essential question in the project is how to collaborate with our target group as part of the production process. This includes what roles the users could have in the process, and on what platforms UR and the users can interact. What role should UR have on such platform? New platforms will affect formats, as well as the content and structure of the productions. Furthermore, it will require a new way of working with metadata and copyright issues.

The digitization affects learning as well as the journalism. The main issue in education is no longer how to use radio and television programs in teaching and learning, but how to develop and improve learning and teaching with the possibilities that the digitization provides us with. This is one of the pedagogical issues that the project considers in order to create utility for the target group.

The shift to digital production takes place on many levels and it is not an easy conversion. It is crucial that everyone involved in production understands how processes and decisions are affected by the digitalisation. When we do that, we will also be able to develop ideas in new ways. Throughout the project “The Youth Channel” we have documented the work process, our workshops and ideas. The project has created a common knowledge base and prototypes for future productions of “The Youth Channel”. We have mapped the current structures and identified what changes that are needed on a system level and in our work processes in order to meet digitalization and its impact on learning and journalism. In addition to the knowledge base, the methodology (IDEO) will be used.

Digital storytelling

Our documentation of the process will be made using traditional and “new” tools. Using a flow chart we will link individual and group events, situations and thoughts together. The flow chart will be filled with different digital material, such as images, screen shots, audio.

Criticial design as a design research tool

Nada Jaffal, Lecturer
German Jordanian University

For the Critical Design and the Creation of Alternative Visions: literally and metaphorically workshop, I will be examining Critical Design through some Design Research lenses as way to help create an understanding and map out where they both overlap, where they part and where they compliment each other.

Research Methodologies:

As design researchers, we thrive to design tools that “enable us to access the deeper levels of people’s experiences by accessing what they create from the research tools we provide for them to use in expressing their thoughts, feelings and dreams” Liz Sanders. This is how we understand and establish empathy with the people who use the products, services and systems we design. Now if Critical Design enables people or users to think of and reflect on alternative realities and possibilities through “hypothetical” products, then incorporating Critical Design as a research methodology into prototyping, scenario building, cocreating.. etc. would not only help us dig deeper into people’s experiences and emotions but also enable them to think of other ways of being and living, other ways of using and utilizing our solutions.

Social Innovation:

“Innovating at the intersection of business, technology and people leads to radical, new experience innovation. The user is the one to decide if a product or a service should exist or be established.” IDEO. Critical Design, if incorporated into the Design Research process, helps us take a different perspective of what we consider normal and helps us reflect on what we’re doing, and that enables us to decide if a product, a service, or a system should transform from being hypothetical/prototype to being produced and used, and that transformation is what sets apart an actual product from a critical design artifact.

Design Ethics:

Some people don’t have basic needs. My present is someone else’s future. Is it ethical to waste time designing objects from another world or provoking alternative realities while the same efforts and resources would be used to solve a current complex problem? Or is provoking alternative realities and possibilities from another world is the solution to current complex problems?

I have been interested with narrative strategies as a way to reach people and provoke meaningful reactions with a designed artefact. I am unfamiliar with the concept of positioning but I can imagine how storytelling would be a relevant way to enable people (in this case, professionals) to reflect on the current paradigms of their practice. For this workshop I would create my digital storytelling using an online platform adapted to everyday personal reporting. It is better if it also allows a general overview/browsing of the content. It could be Storyfy, Tumblr, my facebook account (with a restricted audience) – as it shows track of the chronological evolution. I could also add Vines videos or 1 min Youtube videos to document my practice and thinking day by day. As I already planned to blog on the evolution of my study and the making of my next critical design projects, my next projects (maybe with an industrial partner) would be the perfect occasion to start the documentation. As an interaction designer, my projects take different shapes, mediated on different platforms. They usually address a specific topics: the one of intimate telepresence in the home, the painful feeling of absence, etc.

Digital storytelling plan

I will be documenting my experience as a design researcher and an educator in introducing Critical Design to my students through the classes I teach at the School of Architecture and Built Environemt German Jordanian University. The posts will be reflections on possibilities to use Critical Design in a creative problem solving process. I will also be reflecting on the challenges I face in explaining what is Critical Design to my students and how well do they absorb it and reflect it into their work. Will it make sense to them? Will it make it easier for me to incorporate Critical Design in my pedagogy process if the students understand what it is? Will they see it as design and or art? Will it be an undefined discipline lost in a gray area between art and design? Between creativity and innovation? And is it that if it reaches a market then it’s considered design, but if it ends up in a museum it’s considered art? These kind of questions I will be reflecting upon through digital storytelling.

My proposal for the workshop and tentative understandings, study and usage of critical design will be documented and collected on a page on my website at Also, photos and videos will be tweeted and posted on instagram using the hashtag #CrticialDesignResearchtool for faster access.

Modest interventions in design understandings/Gentle provocations with design practices

Katarina L Gidlund, Associate professor in Informatics
Mid Sweden University

Annelie Ekelin, , Assistant professor within Human Science and Work Practice and Media communication Science.
Linnaeus University

Karin Danielsson Öberg, PhD and senior lecturer in Informatics
Umeå University

Johanna Sefyrin, PhD and senior lecturer in Informatics
Mid Sweden University

To challenge the perceptions, definitions and borders of what counts as design practices or not has gained an increasing amount of attention and for little more than a decade several scholars have devoted their work to the endeavour of establishing design research as an academic discipline of its own with history, theory and criticism (Margolin,1989). Adding to this undertaking is a growing interest in if this body of knowledge should contribute merely as insights for design, or knowledge in design doings, or maybe also add to cooperative and interventionist practices with design with a critical perspective (Lenskjold, 2011). With such a standpoint the critical perspective has twofold objective; (i) that the designed artefacts could be mediators of critical reflection but also (ii) that the design practices themselves could be problem-setters and not only problem-solvers (ibid.) (this in order to avoid the risk of design practices only helping industry commodify results into goods and services [Brun-Cottan, 2009]). With a problem-setting and interventionist focus the aim is to make differences apparent and invoke new possibilities and alternative translations (Lenskjold, 2011). But, how is this done in practice? As many critical undertakings there is no lack of beguiling wordings or examples of the consequences of lack of criticality, but how are we supposed to perform this in practice? What kind of methodologies and tools are we to use? This contribution devotes itself to the expedition of trying to capture the practical doings of critical design through the realisation of a workshop on critical design and as such contribute to some answers to the questions above.

Characterising critical design practices

Throughout arranging the workshop the organizers will try to constantly make reflections on every decision made from a critical perspective asking questions such as: - what is this decision reproducing?, - is there an alternative way of doing this?, and – what are my thoughts when acting in this context?.

The result will be a compound of four individual journals, photos taken and borrowed visualizing pictures and the thought exercise is to then look at them together and make second reflections on whether these instances could be rewarding as showing some parts of the possible practical doings of critical design (their communicative capacity and their ‘practical guideline’ ability).

When attending the workshop we would like the attendees to make meta-reflections on our material and help us understand and review what we have done.

During the workshop

During the workshop: workshop program

The aim of the workshop is to apply critical design in order to create reflective practices and alternative visions, literally and metaphorically, of us as professionals. During the workshop, the pre-workshop materials (such as images, movies, illustrations, photos and texts) will be explored and transformed in order to communicate, envision and understand critical design.

Please note that the workshop participant brings the individual digital stories to the workshop. Digital stories can preferable be available using social media. Any necessary or preferred program for presenting and/or editing the story is made available by the workshop participant him/herself. However, Adobe programs will be available on a MAC computer. Projector and Internet connection will be available, as well as traditional lo-fi workshop materials (pen, paper, post-it) and camera.

The workshop has the following schedule (Green room):

Welcome note and Digital storytelling presentations

Coffee break

Creative process: Re-modelling digital stories


Creating common literal and metaphorical materials: alternative visions

After the workshop

After the workshop: creation of alternative visions

As outcome of the workshop, a collective bank of digital stories regarding critical design: gathered positions, views, roles, expectations, assumptions, experiences, and so forth, will be available from the workshop website. Our alternative visions, expressed literally and metaphorically, will be available for all, in order to communicate, reflect and expand the notion and understanding of critical design.

Call for participartion

Call for participation: Workshop

Submissions due: 1 April 2014

The aim of the workshop is to apply critical design in order to create reflective practices and alternative visions, literally and metaphorically, of us as professionals. Our line of thought in order to achieve this is further presented below.

Critical design

As an approach, critical design (Dunne A., 1999; Raby F. 2001) introduces new ways to look at the world and reflections on the roles of designed objects from an articulated critical standpoint (analyzing power relations and oblivious reproductive practices). As such, critical design “…seeks to disrupt or transgress social and cultural norms.” (Bardzell et al, 2012:288). Through critical design we can embody cultural critique when designing artefacts, where also the object can encourage reflection, therefore, reflection does not necessarily emerge or consist in something built (Sengers et al., 2005). However, this approach does not only regard the design of artefacts. It may also be understood as an approach supporting provocation and reflection among us as professionals (designers, researchers and practitioners).

Nevertheless, such application of the approach demands a shift in view. If considering critical design rather as a position than an approach for design, how can we support reflection among, not only users, but also us as professionals? Thereby, enable usage of critical design in our profession? These, and related questions, will be reflected upon and discussed during the workshop.

This one-day workshop aims to explore ways to enable designers, researchers and practitioners to discover, apply and increase the usage of critical design, by exploring, questioning and provoking ourselves in our own profession. One way of doing this is by using digital storytelling as a pre-workshop activity. Digital storytelling support a creation of materials in both literal and metaphorical ways. Through digital storytelling, we can identify, express and share conscious and unconscious assumptions of critical design as such, as well of us as professionals.

Important dates:

Summary and digital story ideas are due: 1 April 2014
Notification of acceptance: 15 April 2014
Workshop: 15 June 2014

Please note that the workshop participant brings the individual digital stories to the workshop. Any necessary program for presenting the story is made available by the workshop participant. Digital stories can preferable be available using social media.

Number of accepted participants: 5-10 (workshop organizers excluded).


People interested to participate in this workshop are required to submit an up to 300 word summary presenting their present/future interest and/or usage of critical design in their profession. In addition to this, an up to 200 word presentation on ideas of how they plan to create and/or document their digital stories is submitted (see further under ‘Before the workshop’).

Participants in the workshops are expected to register to the conference, and to pay the conference fee. There is no additional fee for attending the workshops.

Workshop organisers

About the organisers

Katarina L Gidlund: Associate professor in Informatics at Mid Sweden University.

Her research focus is on Critical Studies of digital technology and societal change in a variety of different application areas such as digitalization of public sector, open innovation, and participatory practices in societal development. She is part of the editorial board of the International Journal of Public Information Systems, co-coordinator of the Swedish network of eGovernment Research Network and part of the board of SIG eGov.

Karin Danielsson Öberg: PhD and senior lecturer in Informatics at Umeå University, Sweden.

Her research focus on different levels of user participation: identifying, exploring and reflecting on user roles during design, with particular interest in teenagers’ participation during design of digital media. She is currently coordinator of the bachelor program Digital media production at the department of Informatics. She has experience of arranging workshops and panels at NordiCHI, CHI and PDC.

Annelie Ekelin: , Assistant professor within Human Science and Work Practice and Media communication Science.

She has an interest in methods concerning participation in development of e-services and mediation of innovation, interaction design and development of ICT and new media formats, including social media. She is a currently associated researcher and also the Head of the Department of Media and Journalism of Linnaeus University, Sweden. She has been involved in several European projects such as; the Dialogue Project, RISI+, IMMODI and in cross-cultural co-operation with the Te-Net Group from Indian Institute of Technology in Chennai (IIT-M). She has also recently concluded a post doc at the School of Computing at Blekinge institute of technology in participatory design of public e-services

Johanna Sefyrin: PhD and senior lecturer in Informatics at Mid Sweden University.

Her research area is Critical Studies of digital technology and societal change foremost in the application area of e-Government, and more specifically on issues such as power, knowledge, participation and gender in the development of digital technologies.


Please contact us by email



Bardzell, S., Bardzell, J., Forlizzi, J., Zimmerman, J., & Antanitis, J. (2012, June). Critical design and critical theory: The challenge of designing for provocation. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (pp. 288-297). ACM.

Davies, C, Harré, R (1990) Positioning: the discursive construction of selves. Journal for the theory of social behaviour. 20, 43-63.

De Fina, Anna, Georgakopoulou, Alexandra (2012) Analyzing Narrative, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dunne, A. (1999). Hertzian tales. London: MIT press.

Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design noir: The secret life of electronic objects. Springer.

Law , J, Mol; A-M (2000) Situating Technoscience: Ana inquiry into spatiality. Lancaster University.

Rossiter, M., & Garcia, P. A. (2010). Digital storytelling: A new player on the narrative field. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2010(126), 37-48.

Sengers, P., Boehner, K., David, S., & Kaye, J. J. (2005, August). Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility (pp. 49-58). ACM.