This article examines design research’s evolving relationship with the social sciences, specifically, how the turn to practice and the more recent shift to new materialism continue to shape our understanding of designing, as well as inform the methods and practices that are routinely part of design research inquiry. Presented is a review of the principles of practice theory and new materialism, with reference to notable design research that has been informed by each shift. The social sciences, especially practice theory and ethnography, have reoriented design research towards situated, socio-cultural contexts. New materialist research nudges design towards entanglements, vibrant matter and ethico-onto-epistemological accountability and views design as world-making, not problem-solving. There has been an onto-epistemological shift from representation to knowing through becoming, not observing. This review draws attention to the possibilities and potential that new materialist perspectives offer for design research.
AkamaY (2014) Attuning to ethnographic encounters: crafting stories of participatory design. Design Issues30(1): 13–25.
2.
BaradK (2007) Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press.
3.
BennettJ (2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Duke University Press.
4.
BinderTDeMichelisGEhnP, et al. (2011) Design Things. MIT Press.
5.
BlombergJKarastiH (2013) Reflections on 25 years of ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work22(4): 373–423.
6.
BourdieuP (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BraidottiR (2013) The Posthuman. Polity Press.
8.
BuurJBinderTBrandtE (2000) Taking video beyond 'hard data' in user centered design. In: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Palo Alto, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility CPSR.
9.
ChittendenT (2025) Foraging for fashion’s future: the use of mycelium materials and fungi intelligence in fashion design. Fashion, Style & Popular Culture12(1-2): 145–168.
CrossN (ed) (1971) Design Participation: Proceedings of the Design Research Society's Conference. London, Academy Editions.
12.
DonovanJHeinemannTMatthewsB, et al. (2011) Getting the point: the role of gesture in managing intersubjectivity in a design activity. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing25(3): 221–235.
13.
GarfinkelH (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
14.
GergenK (2023) The social sciences as future forming possibilities studies and society. Possibility Studies & Society1(1-2): 81–86.
15.
GinsbergADChiezaN (2018) Other biological futures. Journal of Design Science.
16.
HalseJBrandtEClarkB, et al. (2010) Rehearsing the Future: DAIM design antropological innovation model. Copenhagen: The Danish Design School.
17.
HarawayD (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3): 575–599.
18.
HarawayD (2016) Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.
19.
IngoldT (2013) Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and architecture. Abingdon: Routledge.
20.
KoskinenIZimmermanJBinderT, et al. (2011) Design Research through Practice: From the Lab, Field and Showroom. Waltham: Elservier Inc.
21.
KroghGKoskinenI (2020) Drifting by Intention: Four Epistemic Traditions from within Constructive Design Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
22.
KuhnTS (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
23.
LuckR (2012) 'Doing designing': on the practical analysis of design in practice. Design Studies33(6): 521–529.
24.
LuckR (2014) Seeing architecture in action: designing, evoking and depicting space and form in embodied interaction. International journal of design creativity and innovation2(3): 165–181.
25.
MarenkoB (ed) (2015) Digital Materiality, Morphogenesis and the Intelligence of the Technodigital Object, Deluze and Design. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
26.
OakA (2011) What can talk tell us about design? analysing conversation to understand practice. Design Studies32(3): 211–234.
27.
OttoTSmithRC (2013) Design anthropology: a distinct style of knowing. In: GunnWOttoTSmithRC (eds) Design Anthropology: Theory and Practice. London, Bloomsbury, 1–29.
28.
OxmanNRosenbergJ (2012) Material computation. In: Manufacturing the Bespoke: Making and Prototyping Architecture, 256–265.
29.
PedgelyO (2025) Considerations for planning, conducting and disseminating research through design (RTD). Designing1(1). doi: 10.1177/30497671251392169, In this issue.
30.
SacksH (1992) Lectures on Conversation Vols. 1 and 2. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
31.
SchatzkiTR (2001) The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge.
32.
SchönDA (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Temple Smith.
33.
SmithRSHBaderCSharmaS, et al. (2020) Hybrid living materials: digital design and fabrication of 3D multimaterial structures with programmable biohybrid surfaces. Advanced Functional Materials30(7): 1907401.
