It’s true that all users have needs that designers can learn about during research. But it’s also true that some people have particular needs that designers must take into account — or risk harming that user and failing to meet their needs. Federal designers can fall into these pitfalls without a thoughtful approach. One way to avoid this is to understand how individuals and groups with shared traits or experiences might benefit from an intentional research approach that differs from standard practices. One such group is trauma survivors.

Enter Trauma-Informed Design thinking (TID), which is a research approach designers should consider when they’re designing for or conducting user research with people who may have experienced trauma. For federal designers, there are myriad groups who may fit this category, including refugees fleeing war, veterans with PTSD, and natural disaster survivors. Researching these problems sometimes requires research participants to describe painful experiences from their past or difficult situations they are currently facing. A recent 10x interview with colleagues at the Veterans Affairs noted that reporters of sexual assault may take months to complete the online form about their experience. It’s a lot to ask for people to recount or relive their trauma, sometimes with strangers from "the government."

One idea that TID thinking helped elevate was ‘save and exit’ features on certain government forms. That way, if someone is filling out a form stemming from a domestic violence incident, they can save their progress and return later in case they’re feeling overwhelmed. Best practices happening internationally are helpful as the U.S. moves forward in this area. A recent government initiative in the UK helped develop an "Exit this page" component on their sites for victims of domestic abuse.

Protection for the Participant

Here are a few common safeguards that 10x designers have used when researching with trauma survivors to respect and accommodate their experiences:

  • Ensuring the research participants know they can end the interview at any time, and proactively checking in with participants throughout the interview if they are showing signs of duress
  • Balancing both easy and tough questions, by starting with easier, less tension-fraught questions to avoid intimidating the user
  • Offering the user resources at the end of the interview such as helplines and reading material – these small gestures can have exponentially positive results
  • Being mindful to avoid potentially stigmatizing language. For example, words that may emerge in healthcare or addiction research interviews

Protection for the Researcher

It’s not just the research participants who need to feel safe: The researchers themselves working with trauma survivors also need to feel safe in order to conduct diligent, human-centered research. This matters because for our researchers, the act of interviewing multiple traumatized subjects can cause its own type of trauma, known as Secondary Trauma (ST). Researchers may feel drained, depressed, or anxious. There have been several instances of researchers, investigators, and journalists experiencing ST in recent years as they react to violent situations.

Best practices to avoid this type of trauma-absorption include allowing researchers the time to debrief, share their feelings, and decompress to promote their resilience. Making it okay for researchers to opt out of research they find too difficult is also a must.

The Latest in TID

Trauma informed design is a quickly evolving field. Academic research is informing part of the growth, as researchers look at the benefits of a trauma-informed approach (along with potential harms), and the impact of TID in specific settings. In addition, much of the evolution is being driven by practitioners, who see the value of the approach in helping ensure better outcomes for people everywhere. Stay tuned for how this informs our work in the future.

Tag:

Return to top