College of Architecture, Texas Tech University, 18th and Flint, PO Box 42091, Lubbock, TX 79409-2091, USA.
HERD. 2010 Summer;3(4):75-92. doi: 10.1177/193758671000300407.
As evidence-based design (EBD) emerges as a model of design practice, considerable attention has been given to its research component. However, this overshadows another essential component of EBD-the change agent, namely the designer. EBD introduced a new skill set to the practitioner: the ability to interact with scientific evidence. Industry sources suggest adoption of the EBD approach across a large number of design firms. How comfortable are these designers in integrating research with design decision making? Optimizing the interaction between the primary change agent (the designer) and the evidence is crucial to producing the desired outcomes. Preliminary to examining this question, an architectural design studio was used as a surrogate environment to examine how designers interact with evidence. Twelve students enrolled in a healthcare EBD studio during the spring of 2009. A three-phase didactic structure was adopted: knowing a hospital, knowing the evidence, and designing with knowledge and evidence. Products of the studio and questionnaire responses from the students were used as the data for analysis. The data suggest that optimization of the research-design relationship warrants consideration in four domains: (1) a knowledge structure that is easy to comprehend; (2) phase-complemented representation of evidence; (3) access to context and precedence information; and (4) a designer-friendly vocabulary.
随着循证设计（EBD）成为一种设计实践模式，人们对其研究组成部分给予了相当多的关注。然而，这掩盖了 EBD 的另一个重要组成部分——变革推动者，即设计师。EBD 为从业者带来了新的技能：与科学证据互动的能力。行业消息来源表明，大量设计公司都采用了 EBD 方法。这些设计师在将研究与设计决策相结合方面有多自在？优化主要变革推动者（设计师）和证据之间的相互作用对于产生预期结果至关重要。在研究这个问题之前，一个建筑设计工作室被用作替代环境，以研究设计师如何与证据互动。十二名学生在 2009 年春季注册了医疗保健 EBD 工作室。采用了三阶段的教学结构：了解医院、了解证据以及运用知识和证据进行设计。工作室的作品和学生的问卷调查回答被用作分析数据。数据表明，需要在四个领域考虑研究-设计关系的优化：（1）易于理解的知识结构；（2）证据的阶段互补表示；（3）访问上下文和先例信息；以及（4）设计师友好的词汇。
