The Architectural Model as Augmenting a Sensory Ethnography

References

• Bagnoli, A. 2009. “Beyond the Standard Interview: The Use of Graphic Elicitation and Arts-Based Methods.” Qualitative Research 9 (5): 547–570. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109343625.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, M. 2008. Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Boehner, K., W. Gaver, and A. Boucher. 2014. “Probes.” In Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social, edited by C. Lury and N. Wakeford, 185–201. Abinddon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Buckingham, D. 2009. “Creative” Visual Methods in Media Research: Possibilities, Problems and Proposals.” Media Culture Society 31 (4): 633–652. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443709335280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burry, M., M. Ostwald, P. Downton, and A. Mine. 2007. The Role of Models in the Architectural Design Process. Sydney: Archadia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cranz, G. 2016. Ethnography for Designers. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Day, J. 1994. Creative Visualization with Children: A Practical Guide. Shaftesbury: Mass.: Element.
   Google Scholar
• Dezeuze, A. 2006. “Everyday Life, ‘Relational Aesthetics’ and the ‘Transfiguration of the Commonplace.” Journal of Visual Art Practice 5 (3): 143–152. doi:https://doi.org/10.1386/jvap.5.3.143_1.
   Google Scholar
• Dicks, B. 2014. “Action, Experience, Communication: Three Methodological Paradigms for Researching Multimodal and Multisensory Settings.” Qualitative Research 14 (6): 656–674. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113501687.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dicks, B., B. Soyinka, and A. Coffey. 2006. “Multimodal Ethnography.” Qualitative Research 6 (1): 77–96. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058876.
   Google Scholar
• Driscoll, M. 2013. Model Making for Architects. Malborough: Crowood Press Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, N. 2007. The Ecology of a Model. Oxford: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Echenique, M. H. 1972. “Models a Discussion.” In Urban Space and Structures, edited by L. Martin and L. March, 164–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edvardsson, D., and A. Street. 2007. “Sense or no-sense: the nurse as embodied ethnographer.” International Journal of Nursing Practice 13 (1): 24–32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2006.00605.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• European Association for Architectural Education (EAAE). 2017. “EAAE Charter on Architectural Research.” Accessed August 2019. http://www.eaae.be/about/statutes-and-charter/eaae-charter-architectural-research/
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, M. 2013. Design Research in Architecture: An Overview. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Frayling, C. 1993. “Research in Art and Design.” Royal College of Art Research Papers 1 (1): 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Godfrey, M., P. Chimmel, and V. Todoli. 2014. Richard Hamilton. London: Tate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Graver, W. 2001. Cultural Probes – Probing People for Design Inspiration. Copenhagen: SIGCHI DK.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, R. 2004. “Just What is It That Makes Today’s Homes so Different?” [Digital Print on Paper]. London: TATE.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, S. 1997. “Everyday Architecture.” In Architecture of Everyday, edited by S. Harris and D. Berke, 1–8. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hauberg, J. 2011. “Research by Design: A Research Strategy.” Revista Lusófona de Arquitectura e Educação 5: 46–56.
   Google Scholar
• Hemmings, T., K. Clarke, M. Rancefield, A. Crabtree, and T. Rodden. 2002. “Probing the Probes: Domestic Probes and the Design Process.” In: Participatory Design Conference, Sweden, 23–15 June 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Jaque, A. 2011. IKEA Disobedient [Performance with Ikea Objects]. New York: Andre Jaque.
   Google Scholar
• Knowles, C., and P. Sweetman. 2004. Picturing the Social Landscape: Visual Methods and the Sociological Imagination. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luck, R. 2012. “Kinds of Seeing and Spatial Reasoning: Examining User Participation at an Architectural Design Event.” Design Studies 33 (6): 557–588. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2012.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marco, E., and S. Burgess. 2014. “Not-at-Present-in-Use-Maybe-Never-Again Objects: DEAD STORAGE. [Photography/Participatory Exhibition].”
   Google Scholar
• Marco, E., S. Burgess, P. Pilkington, and S. Hall. 2013. Housing & Stuff, [Website], www.housingmattersuk.com.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, S. 1998. Consumerism as a Way of Life. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• MOMA. 2016. “Andrew Jaque: Ikea Disobedients 2011.” Accessed 30 March 2016. http://www.moma.org/collection/works/156886.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, D. L. 1998. Planning Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, S. 2013. “Design Research: Translating Theory into Practice.” In Design Research in Architecture, an Overview, edited by M. Fraser, 95–116. Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Muthesius, S. 1982. The English Terrace House. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pallasmaa, J. 2005. “Lived Space: Embodied Experience and Sensory Thought.” Encounters: Architectural Essays. Hameenlinna, Finland: Rakennustieto Oy.
   Google Scholar
• Park, P. 2007. “Participatory Action Research.” In Handbook of Action Research, edited by P. Reason and H. Bradbury. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Peeck, J. 1987. “The Role of Illustrations in Processing and Remembering Illustrated Text.” In The Psychology of Illustration, edited by D. M. Willows and H. A. Houghton, Vol I, 115–151. New York: SpringerVerlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, S. 2004. Home Truths: Gender, Domestic Objects and Everyday Life. United States: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, S. 2007. Doing Visual Ethnography. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, S. 2009. Doing Sensory Ethnography. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, S. 2011. “Amateur Photographic Practice, Collective Representation and the Constitution of Place.” Visual Studies 26 (2): 92–101. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2011.571884.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravetz, A. 1995. The Place of Home, English Domestic Environments 1914-2000. New York: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Rendell, J. 2004. “Architectural Research and Disciplinarily.” Architectural Research Quarterly 8 (2): 141–147. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S135913550400017X.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. 2007. Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials. 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. 2014. “On the Relation between ‘Visual Research Methods’ and Contemporary Visual Culture.” The Sociological Review 62 (1): 24–46. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salisbury, F. 1998. Briefing Your Architect. 2nd ed. Oxford: Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scarduzio, J. A., Giannini, G. A. and P. Geist‐Martin. 2011. “Crafting an Architectural Blueprint: Principles of Design for Ethnographic Research.” Symbolic Interaction 34 (4): 447–470. doi:https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2011.34.4.447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seago, A., and A. Dunne. 1999. “New Methodologies in Art and Design Research: The Object as Discourse.” Design Issues 15 (2): 11–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1511838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E., M. Watson, M. Hand, and J. Ingram. 2007. The Design of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 2004. Architectural Model as Machine: A New View of Models from Antiquity to the Present Day. 1st Ed. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Smithson, P., C. Spellman, and K. Unglaub. 2005. Peter Smithson: Conversations with Students. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stonard, J. 2007. “Pop in the Age of Boom: Richard Hamilton’s ‘Just What is It That Makes Today’s Homes so Different, so Appealing?” The Burlington Magazine 149 (1254): 607–620.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, D. 2006. “Cooking Skills, the Senses and Memory: The Fate of Practical Knowledge.” In Sensible Objects, edited by E. Edwards, C. Gosden and R. B. Phillips, 87–118. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• TATE. 2016. “Richard Hamilton: Just What Is It That Makes Today’s Homes So Different? 1992” June 2007. http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hamilton-just-what-is-it-that-makes-todays-homes-so-different-p11358 [Accessed 30 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Thomsen, M. R., and M. Tamke. 2009. “Narratives of Making: Thinking Practice Led Research in Architecture.” Proceedings of the Conference Communicating (by)Design, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Tilley, C. 2006. “The Sensory Dimensions of Gardening.” The Senses and Society 1 (3): 311–330. doi:https://doi.org/10.2752/174589206778476252.
   Google Scholar
• Upton, D. 2002. “Architecture in Everyday Life.” New Literary History 33 (4): 707–723. doi:https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2002.0046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Den Heuvel, D., and M. Risselada. 2004. Alison and Peter Smithson – from the House of the Future to a House of Today. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, J., J. McCarthy, P. Wright, and P. Olivier. 2013. “Making Design Probes Work.” In: CHI 2013: Changing Perspectives. Paris, 27 April–2 May 2013.
   Google Scholar