The Nature of Research

During a previous session, we were asked to read The Nature of Research by Bruce Archer. This got me thinking about Graphic Design as Creative Practice and whether any of my work can be classed as research.

What I gathered from the reading is that for work to be classed as research in any of the given categories, Scientific, Humanities and Creative Practice, it must follow the criteria for that given category. In terms of category placement, the research must fulfill the criteria for the specific category in question and doesn't have to normally be considered as part of that field. I thought this was interesting as it means that no matter what you are researching the work can be classed as a scientific research as long as it follows all the criteria.

Archer discusses creative practice and whether it can be classed as research. He argues that it can be classed as research as long as it follows all the given criteria. I personally, however, am not sure if this is possible for creative practice within a Graphic Design field. Creative practice research, in this case, is for the production of an outcome. Archer discusses that no matter the category of research the sole goal for it to be classed this way must be knowledge. How can creative practice within Graphic Design be considered research when the knowledge gathered is for the creation of an outcome, i.e. a response to a brief, rather than the only goal of the project?

Thought this was interesting so decided to gather my thoughts. The Nature of Research by Bruce Archer is accessible below.

Archer, B. (1995). The Nature of Research. Co-design, 2, 6-13.

I have included the annotated article below.