MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413738042 · doi:10.1017/pds.2025.10244

Making Space for Designers at Hackathons: Uncovering Developer-Designer Tensions in Hackathon Teams

2025· article· en· W4413738042 on OpenAlex
Meagan Flus, Ada Hurst

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Design Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Collaborative designHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringKnowledge managementEngineering managementSystems design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Hackathons have recently garnered significant research interest. Hackathon teams frequently include developer, business, and designer roles, yet the designer role and experience of design in hackathon teams are poorly understood. In this paper, we present findings from ten interviews with designer hackathon participants. A thematic analysis reveals that the responsibilities of designers at hackathons roughly align with more typical design contexts, although the format of hackathon events forces designers to adapt approaches to design. Hackathon participants value teams with diverse skills, including design skills, yet designers face resistance from peers in developer roles when seeking to use established design methods for validating needs and generating solutions. This tension can make designers feel unwelcome at hackathons, harming efforts to attract a more diverse participant pool.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it