This essay details Gaver thoughts around Design Research. He argues that calls for standardisation in [[Research through Design]], in order to make it more scientific in a Popperian sense are misplaced. Instead, Research through design should embrace its ambiguity. Not all design through research theories are falsifiable. **Main ideas** [[Design research is not riguriously scientific]] **My thoughts** I don’t necessarily agree with this point, at least for the purpose of my research. I am interesting in testing if a particular design, in particular a [[dialogic interface]] has a certain impact on a specific metric. This is falsifiable and replicable. I don’t intent to prescribe that a particular design is better, but only if it influences a given measurable outcome. **Reference** Gaver, William. 2012. “What Should We Expect from Research through Design?” In _Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_, 937–46. CHI ’12. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. https://paperpile.com/app/p/ee6d005c-d1c1-0104-ba3b-f421340c7a5e