Sosyal sorumlu tasarım bağlamında davranış değiştirici ürün yaklaşımları: Literatür odaklı tematik bir inceleme

Year 2022, , 144 - 169, 29.07.2022

Ceylan Şahin , Abdüsselam Selami Çifter

https://doi.org/10.37246/grid.1006449

Abstract

Sosyal sorumlu tasarım kavramının; sosyal açıdan yararlı, toplumsal amaçlara ulaşmayı ön plana çıkaran ve kolektif değerlerle yönlendirilen tasarımların geliştirmesiyle kendini gösterdiği görülmektedir. Yapılan çalışmada bu yaklaşımla gerçekleştirilen tasarımlar değerlendirilerek, insanları planlanan davranışa yönlendiren uygulamalar üzerinde bir literatür araştırması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu kapsamda son 15 yılda, “davranış”, “değiştirici”, “sosyal”, “sorumlu”, “ürün”, “tasarımı” anahtar kelimeleri taranarak bulunan tasarımlar incelenmiştir. Tematik analiz metoduyla, örnek açıklamalarında yer alan veriler kodlanarak sosyal sorumlu tasarımlar temalaştırılmıştır. Kodlamalar sonucu dört tema belirmiştir. Araştırmanın sonucunda davranış değiştirme amacı taşıyan sosyal sorumlu tasarımlarda, değiştirme eyleminin gerçekleştirmesini sağlayan örtük bilgiler açığa çıkarılmıştır.

Keywords

Sosyal sorumlu tasarım, Davranış değiştirici ürün tasarımı, Ürünü tasarımı

Supporting Institution

İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi

Behavior changer product approaches in the context of social responsible design: A thematic review focus on literature

Abstract

Regarding the concept of socially responsible design; It has been seen with the development of designs that are socially beneficial, highlight the achievement of social goals and are guided by collective values. The designs made with this approach have been evaluated in this study. In this context, a literature search was conducted on the applications that direct users to the planned behavior. The designs found by scanning the keywords "behavior", "changer", "social", "responsible", "product", "design" in the last 15 years were included in the research. By employing the thematic analysis method, the data in the sample explanations were coded and socially responsible designs were themed, which led to the emergence of four themes. As a result of the research, the implicit information that enables the change in action to be realized in socially responsible designs that aim to change behavior has been revealed.

Keywords

Socially responsible design, behavior changer product design, product design

References

• Ackerman, E. (2018). Robotic tortoise helps kids to learn that robot abuse is a bad thing. Spectrum IEEE, March, 14.
• Ajzen, I. (2020). The Theory of Planned Behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human Behaviour and Emerging Technologies, 2, 314-324
• Becker C. U. (2019). Ethical Principles for Design. In proceedings of the International Association of Societies of Design Research Conference 2019, Mancherster Metropolitan University, 02-05 Eylül, İngiltere.
• Bhamra, T., Lilley, D., & Tang, T. (2011). Design for sustainable Behaviour: Using products to change consumer behaviour. Design Journal, 14(4), 427-445
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis.
• Broms, L., Bång, M., & Hjelm, S. I. (2008). Persuasive Engagement: Exploiting lifestyle as a driving force to promote energy-aware use patterns and behaviours.
• Broms, L., Katzeff, C., Bång, M., Nyblom, Å., Hjelm, S. I., & Ehrnberger, K. (2010, August). Coffee maker patterns and the design of energy feedback artefacts. In proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on designing interactive systems (pp. 93-102).
• Brown, B, Chetty, M., Grimes, A. and Harmon, E. (2006) ‘Reflecting on Health: A system for students to monitor diet and exercise’, Proceedings of CHI 2006, 22-27 April, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp.1807-1812.
• Cash, P., Khadilkar, P., Jensen, J., Dusterdich, C. and Mugge, R. (2020). Designing behaviour change: A behavioural problem/solution (BPS) matrix”. International Journal of Design, 14(2), 65–83.
• Ceschin, F. ve Gaziulusoy I. (2016). Evolution of design for sustainability: from product design to design for system innovations and transitions. Design Studies, 47, 118-163
• Coskun, A., Zimmerman, J., Erbug, C. (2015). Promoting sustainability through behavior change: A review. Design Studies, 41, 183–204.
• de Vere, I., Melles, G., & Kapoor, A. (2011). An ethical stance: Engineering curricula designed for social responsibility. In DS 68-8: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, Vol. 8: Design Education, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08. 2011.
• Ha‐Brookshire, J. E., & Norum, P. S. (2011). Willingness to pay for socially responsible products: case of cotton apparel. Journal of Consumer Marketing.
• Jafarinaimi, N., Forlizzi, J., Hurst, A., & Zimmerman, J. (2005, April). Breakaway: an ambient display designed to change human behavior. In CHI'05 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1945-1948).
• Kandachar, P. V., Diehl, J. C., van Leeuwen, G., & Daalhuizen, J. (2007). Design of products and services for the base of the pyramid.
• Khadilkar, P.R. ve Cash, P. (2020), Understanding behavioural design: barriers and enablers. Journal of Engineering Design, 1–22.
• Kim, S., Hong, J., Lee, J., Choi, H. S., Lee, G., & Lee, W. (2018, June). Touch Branch: Understanding interpersonal touches in interactive installation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference (pp. 535-546).
• Ku, H., Choi, J. J., Lee, S., Jang, S., & Do, W. (2018, March). Shelly, a tortoise-like robot for one-to-many interaction with children. In Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 353-354).
• Lee, I. M., Shiroma, E. J., Lobelo, F., Puska, P., Blair, S. N., Katzmarzyk, P. T., & Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group. (2012). Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. The lancet, 380(9838), 219-229.
• Langer, E. J. (1989). Minding matters: The consequences of mindlessness–mindfulness. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 137-173). Academic Press.
• Lilley, D. (2009). Design for sustainable behaviour: strategies and perceptions. Design studies, 30(6), 704-720.
• Lilley D. ve Wilson G. (2013) Integrating ethics into design for sustainable behaviour. Journal of Design Research, 11 (3), 278-299
• Ljungberg, L. Y. (2007). Materials selection and design for development of sustainable products. Materials & Design, 28(2), 466-479.
• Ludden, G. D. S., & Hekkert, P. (2014, October). Design for healthy behavior: design interventions and stages of change. In 9th International Conference on Design and Emotion 2014: The Colors of Care (pp. 482-488). Ediciones Uniandes.
• Manzini E. (2014). Making Things Happen: Social Innovation and Design. Design Issues V.30(1), 57-66
• Margolin, V., & Margolin, S. (2002). A “social model” of design: Issues of practice and research. Design issues, 18(4), 24-30.
• Matsumura, N., Fruchter, R., & Leifer, L. (2015). Shikakeology: designing triggers for behavior change. AI & SOCIETY, 30(4), 419-429.
• Melles, G., de Vere, I., & Misic, V. (2011). Socially responsible design: thinking beyond the triple bottom line to socially responsive and sustainable product design. CoDesign, 7(3-4), 143-154.
• Niedderer, K. (2007). Designing mindful interaction: the category of performative object. Design issues, 23(1), 3-17.
• Niedderer, K. (2013, August). Mindful design as a driver for social behaviour change. In Proceedings of the IASDR Conference 2013.
• Nikolic, P. K., & Cheok, A. D. (2020). InnerBody: using interactive and multisensory interfaces to design behavioral change. Leonardo, 53(2), 128-134.
• Peeters, M., Megens, C., Van Den Hoven, E., Hummels, C., & Brombacher, A. (2013, April). Social stairs: taking the piano staircase towards long-term behavioral change. In International Conference on Persuasive Technology (pp. 174-179). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2012). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research, Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex.
• Steinmetz, H., Knappstein, M., Ajzen, I., Schmidt, P., & Kabst, R. (2016). How effective are behavior change interventions based on the theory of planned behavior? A three-level meta-analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 224(3), 216–233.
• Tang, T., & Bhamra, T. (2012). Putting consumers first in design for sustainable behaviour: a case study of reducing environmental impacts of cold appliance use. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 5(4), 288-303
• Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Wie man kluge Entscheidungen anstößt. Ullstein eBooks.
• Thorpe A. & Gamman L. (2011). Design with Society: Why socially responsive design is good enough, CoDesign, 7(3-4), 217-230
• Tromp, N., Hekkert, P., & Verbeek, P. P. (2011). Design for socially responsible behavior: a classification of influence based on intended user experience. Design issues, 27(3), 3-19.
• Tromp, N., & Hekkert, P. (2018). Designing for society: Products and services for a better world. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics?. Daedalus, 121-136.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlere Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• “The LifeStraw Concept,” 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde erişildi. https://www.icrw.org/presenting-sponsor-vestergaard-frandsen/
• “The Rollable Water Container For Developing Countries” 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde erişildi. https://www.qdrum.co.za/
• “Smokeless Metal Stove,” 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde erişildi. http://www.rids-nepal.org/index.php/Smokeless_Metal_Stove_SMS.html
• “You Can’t Sanitise What You Can’t Wash” 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde erişildi. https://hipporoller.org/
• "Duracell’s Bus Stop Stunt Gives New Meaning to Holding Hands" 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde erişildi. https://www.brandingmag.com/2014/03/19/duracell-moments-of-warmth/