How we done it good

Research through design as a legitimate methodology for librarianship

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

“How we done it good” publications—a genre concerning project-based approaches that describe how (and sometimes why) something was done—are often rebuked in the library research community for lacking traditional scientific validity, reliability, and generalizability. While scientific methodologies may be a common approach to research and inquiry, they are not the only methodological paradigms. This research posits that the how we done it good paradigm in librarianship reflects a valid and legitimate approach to research. By drawing on the concept of research through design, this study shows how these how we done it good projects reflect design methodologies which draw rigor from process, invention, relevance, and extensibility rather than replicability, generalizability, and predictability. Although these projects implicitly reflect research through design, the methodology is not yet explicitly harnessed in librarianship. More support for these types of projects can be achieved by making the legitimate design framework more explicit and increasing support from publication venues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalLibrary and Information Science Research
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

librarianship
methodology
paradigm
Patents and inventions
invention
genre
community

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Information Systems
  • Library and Information Sciences

Cite this

@article{4ea8b9a1db1845669b89e716773a7ddd,
title = "How we done it good: Research through design as a legitimate methodology for librarianship",
abstract = "“How we done it good” publications—a genre concerning project-based approaches that describe how (and sometimes why) something was done—are often rebuked in the library research community for lacking traditional scientific validity, reliability, and generalizability. While scientific methodologies may be a common approach to research and inquiry, they are not the only methodological paradigms. This research posits that the how we done it good paradigm in librarianship reflects a valid and legitimate approach to research. By drawing on the concept of research through design, this study shows how these how we done it good projects reflect design methodologies which draw rigor from process, invention, relevance, and extensibility rather than replicability, generalizability, and predictability. Although these projects implicitly reflect research through design, the methodology is not yet explicitly harnessed in librarianship. More support for these types of projects can be achieved by making the legitimate design framework more explicit and increasing support from publication venues.",
author = "Rachel Clarke",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.lisr.2018.09.007",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Library and Information Science Research",
issn = "0740-8188",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How we done it good

T2 - Research through design as a legitimate methodology for librarianship

AU - Clarke, Rachel

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - “How we done it good” publications—a genre concerning project-based approaches that describe how (and sometimes why) something was done—are often rebuked in the library research community for lacking traditional scientific validity, reliability, and generalizability. While scientific methodologies may be a common approach to research and inquiry, they are not the only methodological paradigms. This research posits that the how we done it good paradigm in librarianship reflects a valid and legitimate approach to research. By drawing on the concept of research through design, this study shows how these how we done it good projects reflect design methodologies which draw rigor from process, invention, relevance, and extensibility rather than replicability, generalizability, and predictability. Although these projects implicitly reflect research through design, the methodology is not yet explicitly harnessed in librarianship. More support for these types of projects can be achieved by making the legitimate design framework more explicit and increasing support from publication venues.

AB - “How we done it good” publications—a genre concerning project-based approaches that describe how (and sometimes why) something was done—are often rebuked in the library research community for lacking traditional scientific validity, reliability, and generalizability. While scientific methodologies may be a common approach to research and inquiry, they are not the only methodological paradigms. This research posits that the how we done it good paradigm in librarianship reflects a valid and legitimate approach to research. By drawing on the concept of research through design, this study shows how these how we done it good projects reflect design methodologies which draw rigor from process, invention, relevance, and extensibility rather than replicability, generalizability, and predictability. Although these projects implicitly reflect research through design, the methodology is not yet explicitly harnessed in librarianship. More support for these types of projects can be achieved by making the legitimate design framework more explicit and increasing support from publication venues.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054129405&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054129405&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.lisr.2018.09.007

DO - 10.1016/j.lisr.2018.09.007

M3 - Article

JO - Library and Information Science Research

JF - Library and Information Science Research

SN - 0740-8188

ER -