it is. I would then see if it is similar to what I’ve read and understood. Sometimes Google might come up with something easier to understand. Books sometimes tend to complicate things, authors might try to get their intellectual ideas in there in a more complicated way. Google might come up with very easy ways to get information. It’s a mixture of computers and books. (...) Even one book it’s fine. If it’s one book, then it would usually be that book and the computer. At first it would be different sources on the internet and then only one source. But If I have different books with me, I might just go through all the books and one source in the computer online. [Participant F]
Incremental implementation to next stage The series of interviews yielded an important insight into the research practices of current postgraduate students. What is remarkable is that even when every interviewed participant use technology regularly, information artifacts still feature as an important source of information. All the participants expressed to own at least one computer, and some of them acknowledged using tablets and other mobile computers. Still, books are the preferred medium given the fluidity in their manipulation, associated levels of comforts whilst reading, and the sensory complexity they afford. Only participant F declared to base his research practice on digital sources. He mentioned that his degree required him to
acquire information predominately from journals. In this case, research practice is based on digital resources due to printing costs. He would later acknowledge information artifacts as more comfortable to consult. Another important trend to discuss is the perceived efficiency of the research practices. In three of the cases— participants A, C and F— prefaced the description of their paper-based research practices with comments suggesting low efficiency and anachronism. This phenomenon presented an additional challenge to this research. As people perceive paper-based activities as being less efficient, it was deemed likely that the participatory event would be hampered by this perception. In order to address this matter, a provocation prototype was prepared to raise awareness of the mixed nature of present day research environments. It was expected that this tool would prevent designers in the body-storming session to restrain their efforts to input paradigms such as keyboard and mouse. The next section gives a general description of the narrative for the provocation prototype. Generally speaking, the four main areas observed in this qualitative exercise were integrated: (1) Memory and embodiment, (2) Architectonic system and surfaces, (3) Information artifacts embody information filters, (4) Information need related to media.
45