PHYSICAL MODELS AND DESIGN COGNITION: TRIANGULATING CONTROLLED LAB STUDIES WITH INDUSTRIAL CASE STUDIES

Physical models are a potential tool which affects designers’ cognition, and very little quantified data exists about the use of physical representation within the idea generation process. Physical models are widely implemented in the engineering design process. There are conflicting results and guidelines about the implementation of these representations as a tool for idea generation. A prior controlled study demonstrates that physical models supplement designers’ incomplete and erroneous mental models, thereby leading to more functional ideas but does not cause design fixation. Another observation study indicates physical representations induce design fixation, thereby reducing the variety of ideas. This paper explores the seemingly conflicting results through a qualitative coding of industrial projects and innovative product design case studies. Consistent with prior laboratory studies, the results show that physical models support the mental models of the designer.

[1]  James O Prochaska,et al.  A discussion with James O. Prochaska, PhD. Interview by Paul E. Terry. , 2012, American journal of health promotion : AJHP.

[2]  G. Goldschmidt To see eye to eye: the role of visual representations in building shared mental models in design teams , 2007 .

[3]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[4]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  A study of prototypes, design activity, and design outcome , 2005 .

[5]  Chee Kai Chua,et al.  Rapid Prototyping:Principles and Applications , 2010 .

[6]  Dennis E. Egan,et al.  Handbook of Human Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[7]  Bo T. Christensen,et al.  The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: the case of engineering design , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[8]  Charles Hill,et al.  What do Prototypes Prototype , 1997 .

[9]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Development of a Functional Basis for Design , 2000 .

[10]  Daniel A. McAdams,et al.  A Component Taxonomy as a Framework for Computational Design Synthesis , 2009, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[11]  Carl Auerbach,et al.  Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis , 2003 .

[12]  Jami J. Shah,et al.  Evaluation of idea generation methods for conceptual design: Effectiveness metrics and design of experiments , 2000 .

[13]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Mental models in design teams: a valid approach to performance in design collaboration? , 2007 .

[14]  M. Einhorn Art as Innovation , 2002 .

[15]  Margot Brereton,et al.  An observational study of how objects support engineering design thinking and communication: implications for the design of tangible media , 2000, CHI.

[16]  William Lidwell,et al.  Universal Principles of Design , 2003 .

[17]  K. L. Edwards Product design: Practical methods for the systematic development of new products: Mike Baxter Chapman & Hall, 1995, ISBN 0-412-63230-6, 308pp, £24.99 , 1995 .

[18]  Willett Kempton,et al.  Two Theories of Home Heat Control , 1986, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  Takashi Kiriyama,et al.  Strategic knowledge acquisition: a case study of learning through prototyping , 1998, Knowl. Based Syst..

[20]  Julie S. Linsey,et al.  Physical Models in Idea Generation: Hindrance or Help? , 2010 .