Aesthetics in design science research

References

• Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of building. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. (2012). The social psychology of creativity. Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. (2013). Componential theory of creativity. In E. H. Kessler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of management theory (pp. 134–139). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 123–167.
   Google Scholar
• Arruda-Filho, E. J., Cabusas, J. A., & Dholakia, N. (2010). Social behavior and brand devotion among iPhone innovators. International Journal of Information Management, 30(6), 475–480.10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baskerville, R., Kaul, M., & Storey, V. (2015). Genres of inquiry in design-science research: Justification and evaluation of knowledge production. MIS Quarterly, 39(3).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baskerville, R., & Pries-Heje, J. (2010). Explanatory design theory. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 2(5), 271–282.10.1007/s12599-010-0118-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathurst, R. (2009). Enlivening management practice through aesthetic engagement. Philosophy of Management, 7(2), 61–76.10.5840/pom20097229
   Google Scholar
• Bell, C. (1972). Art. London: Chatto & Windus, 1914. Benjamin, Walter ‘A Short History of Photography’ Screen, 13(1), 5–26.
   Google Scholar
• Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Design Matters for Management. na.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, F. P. (2010). The design of design: Essays from a computer scientist. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee, S. (2015). Writing my next design science research master-piece: But how do i make a theoretical contribution to Dsr? In European Conference on Information Systems. Münster.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, B. T., & Ball, L. J. (2016). Dimensions of creative evaluation: Distinct design and reasoning strategies for aesthetic, functional and originality judgments. Design Studies, 45, 116–136.10.1016/j.destud.2015.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collingwood, R. G. (1938). The principles of art. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.10.1162/074793601750357196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Cupchik, G. C., & Gebotys, R. J. (1988). The search for meaning in art: Interpretive styles and judgments of quality. Visual Arts Research, 14(2), 38–50.
   Google Scholar
• Cupchik, G. C., & Heinrichs, R. W. (1981). Toward an integrated theory of aesthetic perception in the visual arts. In H. I. Day (Ed.), Advances in intrinsic motivation and aesthetics (pp. 463–485). Boston, MA: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4613-3195-7
   Google Scholar
• Currie, G. (2001). Imagination and make-believe. In B. Gaut & D. M. Lopes (Eds.), The Routledge companion to aesthetics (pp. 253–262). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York, NY: Minton, Balch & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, L., & Gero, J. S. (2001). The emergence of the representation of style in design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28(5), 707–731.10.1068/b2730
   Google Scholar
• Dutton, D. (2001). Aesthetic universals. In B. Gaut & D. M. Lopes (Eds.), The Routledge companion to aesthetics (pp. 203–214). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dutton, D. (2009). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, & human evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Phronetic planning research: Theoretical and methodological reflections. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(3), 283–306.10.1080/1464935042000250195
   Google Scholar
• Gill, T. G., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). A fitness-utility model for design science research. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 4(2), 5.
   Google Scholar
• Glanville, R. (1999). Researching design and designing research. Design Issues, 15(2), 80–91.10.2307/1511844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman, N. (1977). When is art. In D. N. Perkins & B. Leondar (Eds.), The arts and cognition (pp. 11–19). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gopnik, B. (2012). Aesthetic science and artistic knowledge. In A. P. Shimamura & S. E. Palmer (Eds.), Aesthetic science: Connecting minds, brains, and experience (pp. 129–159). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2015). The front end of innovation: Perspectives on creativity, knowledge and design. In B. Donnellan, M. Helfert, J. Kenneally, D. VanderMeer, M. Rothenberger, & R. Winter (Eds), New horizons in design science: Broadening the research agenda (pp. 249–263). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. (1983). Transformotion abilities or functions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 17(2), 75–83.10.1002/jocb.1983.17.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harfield, S. (2007). On design ‘problematization’: Theorising differences in designed outcomes. Design Studies, 28(2), 159–173.10.1016/j.destud.2006.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haugstvedt, A. C., & Krogstie, J. (2012). Mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage: A technology acceptance study. In International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), 2012 (pp. 247–255). Atlanta, GA: IEEE.10.1109/ISMAR.2012.6402563
   Google Scholar
• van der Heijden, H. (2003). Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in The Netherlands. Information & Management, 40(6), 541–549.10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00079-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & Wieringen, P. C. (2003). ‘Most advanced, yet acceptable’: Typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. British Journal of Psychology, 94(1), 111–124.10.1348/000712603762842147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hester, M. (1975). Sensibility and visual acts. American Philosophical Quarterly, 12(4), 299–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hevner, A. R. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92.
   Google Scholar
• Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004, March). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickman, R. (2010). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, and human evolution. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(3), 349–350.10.1111/jade.2010.29.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.10.2307/1251707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iivari, J. (2007). A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 39–63.
   Google Scholar
• Isenberg, A. (1949). Critical communication. The Philosophical Review, 58(4), 330–344.10.2307/2182081
   Google Scholar
• John, E. (2001). Art and knowledge. In B. Gaut & D. M. Lopes (Eds.), The Routledge companion to aesthetics (pp. 329–352). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, J. S. (2002). John Dewey and the role of scientific method in aesthetic experience. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21(1), 1–15.10.1023/A:1014457300559
   Google Scholar
• Kant, I. (1908). The critique of pure reason (1781). In B. Rand (Ed.), Modern classical philosophers (pp. 370–456). Cambridge, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Kant, I. (1987). Critique of judgement (1790). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
   Google Scholar
• Kasper, G. M. (1996). A theory of decision support system design for user calibration. Information Systems Research, 7(2), 215–232.10.1287/isre.7.2.215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilminster, R. (2006). Praxis. In W. Outhwaite (Ed.), The Blackwell dictionary of modern social thought (p. 519). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Krogstie, J., & Haugstvedt, A.-C. (2015). Use of mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage. In W. Barfield (Ed.), Fundamentals of wearable computers and augmented reality (2nd ed., pp. 411–432). CRC Press.10.1201/b18703
   Google Scholar
• Kruft, H.-W. (1994). History of architectural theory. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lavie, T., & Tractinsky, N. (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(3), 269–298.10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95(4), 489–508.10.1348/0007126042369811
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liedtka, R. M., dt ogilvie, J., Friedel, R., & Liedtka, J. (2007). Possibility thinking: Lessons from breakthrough engineering. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(4), 30–37.
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, E. J. (2005). Analysis. In T. Honderich (Ed.), The Oxford companion to philosophy (p. 28). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995, December). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.10.1016/0167-9236(94)00041-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., & Gasser, L. (2002). A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. MIS Quarterly, 26(3), 179–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martindale, C. (1989). Personality, situation, and creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 211–232). Boston, MA: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4757-5356-1
   Google Scholar
• Mettler, T., Eurich, M., & Winter, R. (2014). On the use of experiments in design science research: A proposition of an evaluation framework. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 34(1), 223–240.
   Google Scholar
• Mill, J. S. (1891). Utilitarianism (11th ed.). New York, NY; London: Longmans, Green.
   Google Scholar
• Mohrman, S. A. (2007). Having relevance and impact: The benefits of integrating the perspectives of design science and organizational development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(1), 12–22.10.1177/0021886306298185
   Google Scholar
• Mora, S., Boron, A., & Divitini, M. (2012). Cromar: Mobile augmented reality for supporting reflection on crowd management. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 4(2), 88–101.10.4018/IJMHCI
   Google Scholar
• Owen, C. L. (1998). Design research: Building the knowledge base. Design Studies, 19(1), 9–20.10.1016/S0142-694X(97)00030-6
   Google Scholar
• Petter, S., Khazanchi, D., & Murphy, J. D. (2010). A design science based evaluation framework for patterns. ACM SIGMIS Database, 41(3), 9–26.10.1145/1851175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich, Y. (1993). A model of aesthetic judgment in design. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 8(2), 141–153.10.1016/0954-1810(93)90023-9
   Google Scholar
• Rifkin, A. D. (2006). Sociology of art. In W. Outhwaite (Ed.), The Blackwell dictionary of modern social thought (pp. 27–30). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Root-Bernstein, R. S. (1989). Discovering: Inventing and solving problems at the frontiers of scientific knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
   Google Scholar
• Root-Bernstein, R. S., & Root-Bernstein, M. (1999). Sparks of genius: The thirteen thinking tools of the world’s most creative people. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
   Google Scholar
• Sartwell, C. (2016). Beauty. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/beauty/
   Google Scholar
• Schellekens, E. (2012). Aesthetic properties. In A. P. Shimamura & S. E. Palmer (Eds.), Aesthetic science: Connecting minds, brains, and experience (pp. 84–97). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shelley, J. (2015). The concept of the aesthetic. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/aesthetic-concept/
   Google Scholar
• Sibley, F. (2001). Approach to aesthetics: Collected papers on philosophical aesthetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0198238991.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1988). The science of design: Creating the artificial. Design Issues, 4(1/2), 67–82.10.2307/1511391
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tolstoy, L. (1913). What is art? What is religion? New York, NY: Chas Scribner’s Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Tractinsky, N. (2004). Toward the study of aesthetics in information technology. In ICIS 2004 Proceedings (p. 62).
   Google Scholar
• Vaishnavi, V. K., & Kuechler, W. (2015). Design science research methods and patterns: Innovating information and communication technology (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.10.1201/b18448
   Google Scholar
• van Aken, J. E. (2007, March 1). Design science and organization development interventions: Aligning business and humanistic values. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(1), 67–88.10.1177/0021886306297761
   Google Scholar
• Van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2016). FEDS: A framework for evaluation in design science research. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 77–89.10.1057/ejis.2014.36
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstijnen, I. M., van Leeuwen, C., Goldschmidt, G., Hamel, R., & Hennessey, J. (1998). Sketching and creative discovery. Design Studies, 19(4), 519–546.10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00017-9
   Google Scholar
• Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36–59.10.1287/isre.3.1.36
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 516–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. (2014/2015). Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winter, R. (2008). Design science research in Europe. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5), 470–475.10.1057/ejis.2008.44
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar