Discursive design thinking: The role of explicit knowledge in creative architectural design reasoning

Abstract

The main hypothesis investigated in this paper is based upon the suggestion that the discursive reasoning in architecture supported by an explicit knowledge of spatial configurations can enhance both design productivity and the intelligibility of design solutions. The study consists of an examination of an architect's performance while solving intuitively a well-defined problem followed by an analysis of the spatial structure of their design solutions. One group of architects will attempt to solve the design problem logically, rationalizing their design decisions by implementing their explicit knowledge of spatial configurations. The other group will use an implicit form of such knowledge arising from their architectural education to reason about their design acts. An integrated model of protocol analysis combining linkography and macroscopic coding is used to analyze the design processes. The resulting design outcomes will be evaluated quantitatively in terms of their spatial configurations. The analysis appears to show that an explicit knowledge of the rules of spatial configurations, as possessed by the first group of architects can partially enhance their function-driven judgment producing permeable and well-structured spaces. These findings are particularly significant as they imply that an explicit rather than an implicit knowledge of the fundamental rules that make a layout possible can lead to a considerable improvement in both the design process and product. This suggests that by externalizing the design knowledge and restructuring it in a design model, creative thought can efficiently be evolved and stimulated.

Information Processing and Assessment for Improved Computational Energy Modelling

“…Design thinking is closely associated with the information at hand, previous experience [5,6], skills, and knowledge background [7,8] of the designer -whether the knowledge at hand is explicit and/or implicit [9]. It is widely accepted that the architectural design, especially in the CDS, has cyclic procedures of processing and transforming of design knowledge in order to create design solutions based on the problem definition, limitations, and requirements [10].…”

Sculptors, Architects, and Painters Conceive of Depicted Spaces Differently

“…Since expert terminology refers to expert concepts, the specific professional language might more fundamentally foster distinct conceptualizations of space. For example, architects frequently reason with two‐ and three‐dimensional representations of space (Al‐Sayed, Dalton, & Hölscher, ; Dalton, Höelscher, & Spiers, ; Hölscher & Dalton, ), which can be used, for example, to help “design the limits that give the impression of space” (Souto de Moura, 2014) . In addition, architects are required to perform a substantial amount of spatial transformation and perspective taking (Brösamle & Hölscher, ).…”

Understanding of a product/service system design: a holistic approach to support design for remanufacturing

“…For instance, the categories used in architectural design [36] are for cognitive actions: physical (e.g., move a pen), perceptual (e.g., attend to shapes), functional, and conceptual. Another example [11] uses three columns for an episode of physical product design: the first column is from the viewpoint of the design object and coded by 'Function', 'Behavior', and 'Structure' as well as by different levels of abstraction.…”