Abstract
Prevailing design methodologies and models tend to contain language specific to pragmatic and contextual foundations of design history and culture. Consequently, these models provide limited support for the diverse and constructive nature of contemporary design practice, and particularly, lack the presence of embedded reflexivity. This paper seeks to determine the predominant and excluded language of 66 design process models, which function as projections of instruction and value in design dissemination. In the analysis, special attention is given to omissions within these process models, as well as their differences among more recently documented methodologies. As a result, the paper explores reflexive language in contrast to dominant pragmatism as a significant area of potential for the future of design models and process evolution. The discussion concludes with reconsiderations of how language guides design processes, the impact of models on design practice, and an assessment of consistencies and opportunities within design model representations.
Keywords
reflexivity, design models, design methods, design language
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.1099
Citation
Jackson, A.R. (2026) The language of reflexivity: Investigating limitations and opportunities for reflexivity in prevailing design process models, in Simeone, L., Gray, C. M., Verhoeven, A., de Götzen, A., Bakırlıoğlu, Y., Zohar, H., Stead, M., and Buwert, P. (eds.), DRS2026: Edinburgh, 8–12 June, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.1099
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Included in
The language of reflexivity: Investigating limitations and opportunities for reflexivity in prevailing design process models
Prevailing design methodologies and models tend to contain language specific to pragmatic and contextual foundations of design history and culture. Consequently, these models provide limited support for the diverse and constructive nature of contemporary design practice, and particularly, lack the presence of embedded reflexivity. This paper seeks to determine the predominant and excluded language of 66 design process models, which function as projections of instruction and value in design dissemination. In the analysis, special attention is given to omissions within these process models, as well as their differences among more recently documented methodologies. As a result, the paper explores reflexive language in contrast to dominant pragmatism as a significant area of potential for the future of design models and process evolution. The discussion concludes with reconsiderations of how language guides design processes, the impact of models on design practice, and an assessment of consistencies and opportunities within design model representations.