The cognitive construct of design conversation

Khaidzir, Khairul Anwar Mohamed; Lawson, Bryan

doi:10.1007/s00163-012-0147-8

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This aspect has also been studied and corroborated by others [28,29]. Other aspects of design cognition studied include: Chan's study on the formation of architectural style [30,31], Liikkanen and Perttula's evaluation of problem decomposition modes [32], and Khaidzir and Lawson's analysis of cognitive actions that take place through conversations between tutors and students [33]. Gero et al [34] used protocol analysis to study the effect of "structuredness" of three ideation methods on design cognition.…”

Section: Protocol Studiesmentioning

confidence: 80%

Empirical Studies of Designer Thinking: Past, Present, and Future

Dinar

Shah

Cagan

et al. 2015

Journal of Mechanical Design

104

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding how designers think is core to advancing design methods, tools, and outcomes. Engineering researchers have effectively turned to cognitive science approaches to studying the engineering design process. Empirical methods used for studying designer thinking have included verbal protocols, case studies, and controlled experiments. Studies have looked at the role of design methods, strategies, tools, environment, experience, and group dynamics. Early empirical studies were casual and exploratory with loosely defined objectives and informal analysis methods. Current studies have become more formal, factor controlled, aiming at hypothesis testing, using statistical design of experiments (DOE) and analysis methods such as analysis of variations (ANOVA). Popular pursuits include comparison of experts and novices, identifying and overcoming fixation, role of analogies, effectiveness of ideation methods, and other various tools. This paper first reviews a snapshot of the different approaches to study designers and their processes. Once the current basis is established, the paper explores directions for future or expanded research in this rich and critical area of designer thinking. A variety of data may be collected, and related to both the process and the outcome (designs). But there are still no standards for designing, collecting and analyzing data, partly due to the lack of cognitive models and theories of designer thinking. Data analysis is tedious and the rate of discoveries has been slow. Future studies may need to develop computer based data collection and automated analyses, which may facilitate collection of massive amounts of data with the potential of rapid advancement of the rate of discoveries and development of designer thinking cognitive models. The purpose of this paper is to provide a roadmap to the vast literature for the benefit of new researchers, and also a retrospective for the community.

show abstract

Section: Protocol Studiesmentioning

confidence: 80%

Empirical Studies of Designer Thinking: Past, Present, and Future

Dinar

Shah

Cagan

et al. 2015

Journal of Mechanical Design

104

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, Khaidzir and Lawson (2013) highlight that handling a PD activity entails perceptual activities which transpire between engineers, representations and artefacts. Boujut (2003) studies the role of representations and artefacts; he examines the cognitive dimension of annotations added to artefacts and states that these facilitate the creation of individual and shared understanding among the participants.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schön's (1983) 'reflective practitioner' is a seminal contribution to understanding how engineers handle each PD activity, and indeed his Deweyan pragmatic approach has formed the basis for several studies. For example, the handling of a PD activity draws on discourse and cognitive actions (Khaidzir and Lawson, 2013), situated cognitive processes (Kelly and Gero, 2014), collective cognition (Kleinsmann et al, 2012) and that a team's mental model belongs to the cognitive realm (Dong et al, 2013). The engineers' cognition is central in these studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing product development activities: the role of experience and ends-in-view

Mathiasen

2017

IJIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on Deweyan pragmatism and the Science-Technology-Society approach, this ethnographic research aims at understanding the role of experience and ends-in-view when handling a product development activity. The research focuses on doings conceptualised as engineer-artefact reciprocity and contributes to practice-based learning and product development studies. The analysis demonstrates that past activities embodied in experience and materialised in artefacts and, likewise, future activities embodied in ends-in-view influence the handling of an activity differently, resulting in either a derailment of handling the activity, habitual completion or reflective completion of the activity. Derailment occurs when experienced engineers are incapable of achieving a common end-in-view; habitual completion is when engineers form a vague end-in-view and no one challenges this; and past experience combined with the formation of a common end-in-view paves the way for reflective completion of the activity. Only the lastmentioned facilitates engineers to gain new experience and create usable artefacts.

show abstract

“…In detailing design, designers take the final shape of the form of the idea that consists of precise and structured forms of dimensioned drawing and straight line (Table 3). Khaidzir and Lawson (2013) propose a Cognitive Interaction Matrix (CIM) framework for examining the intricate nature of design studio interactions. CIM illustrates encoded cognitive segments for each design tutorial meeting recorded for the aim of the study.…”

Section: Levels Of Detailingmentioning

confidence: 99%