Designers draw on a significant volume and range of information throughout the design process. This could include information on people, materials, markets, processes, etc. However, not all this information is effectively communicated to and used by designers. In order to provide designers with information that is useful, useable and engaging for them, it is important to understand why designers use information, what information they use and when and how they use it. This will be collectively referred to as ‘information behaviour’ in this thesis. There is currently a lack of a holistic understanding of designers’ information behaviour. Through developing a framework for investigation, analysis and reflection on designers’ use and requirements of information, this research aims to provide a better understanding of information behaviour in design, leading to a systematic way to address the key dimensions of information used in a design process. For this purpose, the research focuses on ‘practicing designers’ as key users of information in the real-world practice of design and ‘people information’ as a major type of information used during the design process. An initial framework for addressing key dimensions of information used in the design process is outlined through the analysis and synthesis of relevant literature. The framework is then evaluated and refined through four complementary studies: an interview and questionnaire administered to nine design companies; observation of a design team in a real-world design project; observation of three teams through a design competition; and a survey of designers and design researchers. The outcomes of the studies lead to a refined version of the information framework that includes seven key dimensions and details designers’ behaviour in regard to ‘purpose’, ‘source’, ‘format’, ‘type’, ‘at tributes’, ‘stage’ and ‘intensity’ of people information they use. The research conducted with designers leads to an enhanced understanding of their information behaviour with respect to the seven key dimensions. A new information framework has been created and evaluated; and it is argued that it can be used as a research and education tool to investigate and analyse information used during core stages of a design process. The framework can also assist developers of information tools to make informed decisions on what, how and when to communicate information to designers, ensuring that this information is delivered in a way which has maximum impact on the design process.

In a 20-year period, AR has gone from being viewed as a heavyweight technology to a new medium for a variety of applications. As a result there has been an increasing need for tools to support AR design and development that fully address the needs of non-technologists. From my AR research, I learned that three critical components for these authoring tools are support for an established content pipeline, rapid prototyping, and user experience testing. The history of media teaches us that AR also shares underlying technologies with a variety of more mature media such as film, VR, and the web with existing workflows and tools. Therefore, we created an AR authoring tool that supported these three critical components, and whose design was informed by established approaches in these related domains, allowing developers with a range of technical expertise to explore the AR medium. In this dissertation I present four main contributions. The first was an exploration of the AR design space focused on close collaboration with designers. This work resulted in guidelines for AR authoring tools, and informed the development of the Designer's Augmented Reality Toolkit (DART). These guidelines were validated via internal and external projects. A qualitative study of long term DART use that provided insight into the successes and failures of DART as well as additional understanding of AR authoring needs. Lastly, I trace two main threads to highlight the impact of this work, the development of the AR Second Life system and the creation of the Argon AR web browser.

Influencée par la complexité des projets de design, la pratique du designer change. Cette dernière a évolué d’une approche plutôt intuitive, à une production industrialisée, jusqu’à des pratiques très sociales, notamment participatives, favorisant la prise de décisions démocratiques et l’engagement actif de non-experts. Dans ce contexte, le designer prend de nouveaux rôles et crée de nouvelles méthodes en vue d’impliquer des acteurs variés dans les projets. Or, dans cet exercice, la mobilisation de non-experts soulève divers enjeux relatifs à leur encadrement et participation. Ainsi, malgré l’expertise que l’on reconnaît au designer pour aborder des situations mal définies, faciliter la collaboration et co-construire des solutions, l’implication des non-experts doit être faite de façon réfléchie. Cette problématique nous incite à interroger de quelles manières le designer conduit-il le projet de design lorsque celui-ci est abordé selon une approche participative ? En posant cette question, nous espérons amener les praticiens à s’intéresser à leur rôle, au moment même où leur pratique se construit. Pour atteindre cet objectif, nous avons défini l’approche participative avec ses principes guides et fondements théoriques. Ensuite, nous avons mobilisé le modèle de l’Éclipse de l’objet (Findeli et Bousbaci, 2005) pour définir la pratique du projet de design. L’étude du modèle a permis de mieux saisir qui sont les acteurs du projet de design et les expériences qu’ils tirent de ce contexte. Une collecte de données organisée autour d’une revue intensive de la littérature a permis de brosser le portrait de la pratique participative du designer. Pour interpréter les données tirées de cette revue, le modèle de l’éclipse de l’objet a été mobilisé. Ainsi, des thèmes dominants concernant les acteurs experts et non-experts des approches participatives ont pu être extraits. Leur analyse a permis de formuler des constats quant aux rôles, aux postures et aux responsabilités des différents acteurs ainsi qu’à leurs dynamiques sociales et aux bagages de chacun. L’ensemble de la recherche nous fournit une meilleure compréhension des manières avec lesquelles le designer développe le projet de design selon une approche participative. / Influenced by the growing complexity of design projects, the designer’s practice is evolving. What used to be a more intuitive approach has progressed to industrialized production, and highly social practices, including participatory approaches, which favour democratic decision making and active involvement from non-experts. In that context, designers are taking on new roles and developing novel methods to engage various players. Involving non-experts, however, is bringing forward a range of issues surrounding their supervision and participation. Notwithstanding a designer’s recognized expertise addressing wicked situations, facilitating collaboration and building solutions with others, involving non-experts must be done thoughtfully. This issue prompts the question: in what ways does a designer navigate a design project when a participatory approach is taken? In examining this, the goal is to encourage practitioners to consider their role as they are building their practice. Achieving this has involved establishing what constitutes a participatory approach and defining its guiding principles and theoretical foundations, as well as leveraging the Eclipse of the object (Findeli & Bousbaci, 2005) model to define design project practice. Study of this model has allowed for a better understanding of the actors involved in a design project and of the experience they gain from contributing. Data collection organized around a scoping review has also helped provide an overview of a designer’s participatory practice, using the Eclipse of the object model to interpret the information gathered and extract overarching themes related to participatory approach experts and non-experts. Analysis of this data has helped draw conclusions regarding the role, position, responsibilities, social dynamics, and experiences of various actors. This research, as a whole, unlocks a deeper understanding of the ways in which a designer develops a design project using a participatory approach.

In the development of digitally connected solutions that require the use of personal data, the issue of data privacy is an important factor that must be taken into account. Simply informing users about how data is used and getting their consent with a simple click is not enough to create awareness of the issue of data privacy and let them make a conscious decision about the use of their personal data. Furthermore, there is a big gap in knowledge about what personal data is and what is considered sensitive data. Especially the knowledge about what biometric identifiers that they are used in a variety of everyday life applications and in which sense the handling can be problematic is unknown.This thesis project explores how the use of critical play in form of an activist game can create awareness of the issue of data privacy, inform about the value of biometric data and foster self-reflection of handling one’s own personal data. Through the simulation of dependencies between personal data, the motivation to share them and the aggregation of personal data in combination with real and prospective use cases, players are empowered to reflect on their behaviour and to critically deal with the topic of data privacy.

國際上工程契約範本中多半就契約義務程度有所約定，國際諮詢工程師聯合會（Fédération Internationale Des Ingénieurs-Conseils, FIDIC）參照大英國協普通法上見解，於「生產設備及設計施工標準契約條款」與「設計採購施工/統包標準契約條款」等統包契約範本中，明文就統包承包商之設計義務採取合乎目的義務標準（fitness for purpose），亦即統包承包商應擔保工程完工時將合乎工程預期之使用目的。該義務標準不同於多數工程契約範本所採大英國協普通法專業服務契約一般適用的合理技術與謹慎(reasonable skill and care)標準，義務人須擔保一定結果之達成，乃無涉義務人業務執行行為有無過失之絕對義務，義務人不得以其已善盡專業注意義務或所需技術超乎科技水準為抗辯，亦不得主張業主就損害之發生或擴大與有過失而減輕賠償責任。而以契約明文約定適用合乎目的義務標準者，大英國協司法見解認為合乎目的義務標準將優先於遵照契約所定計畫或規範之義務，加以合乎目的義務難以取得保險保障，種種不利因素引起統包承包商之高度顧慮。 傳統設計後發包施作之工程契約模式下，大英國協普通法見解認為專業設計人員之契約默示義務標準與其他專業服務契約同為合理技術與謹慎義務，與統包承包商之設計工作默示適用合乎目的義務標準不同。本文由大英國協普通法案例觀察，相關見解差異與貨物買賣契約法律原則息息相關，並且受到當代法律經濟分析思維影響。然依本文之觀察，近年大英國協司法見解在合乎目的義務之默示適用及明示適用，似均出現避免適用該義務標準之案例，相關判決理由於大英國協司法見解之後續發展殊值觀察。 我國司法實務對統包工程契約之評價與大英國協普通法側重於不同契約特徵，而屬歐陸成文法系之我國法及德國法中，承攬人負有使完成工作無不適於通常或約定使用之瑕疵擔保責任，與大英國協普通法上合乎目的義務同為無過失責任。惟依本文觀察，歐陸法系之承攬人瑕疵擔保責任並不如大英國協普通法合乎目的義務嚴格，承攬人有較多減輕或免責事由可資主張，而我國司法實務見解下，承攬人免責之可能性又更高於德國法。 統包工程契約中之合乎目的義務約款並非獨立存在，其實質內涵仍需視各法域適用法律之具體內容而定。本文彙整比較統包工程契約設計工作之合乎目的義務於大英國協普通法系、歐陸成文法系之德國法及我國法之司法實務見解適用差異，期在相互參照之中，對各該司法見解提出評析建議，並供我國工程產業爭取海外標案時作為契約法律風險管理之參考。