In-Vitro Design Protocol: Artificial Situation Strategy Uses to Comprehend Designers’ Thought

The challenge of current trends in design research and point out some of their activities, such as the gap between aesthetic and technical need, and the chasm between ambiguous and quantified in design practice. So, it is hard to surprise the product designers fail to combine a systematical methodology in analyzing design activity. This paper will assess the comprehensible and abilities of In-Vitro Design Protocol (IVDP) in mapping and analyzing design activities. This paper thus attempts to provide a systematic design investigation to researcher and discuss a few key demands on such foundation, include the capture and monitoring used for observational studies in artificial environment strategy.

[1]  Kees Dorst,et al.  The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application , 2011 .

[2]  T. B. Ward,et al.  The inadvertent use of prior knowledge in a generative cognitive task , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[3]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[4]  Bahar Sener,et al.  User evaluation of HCI concepts for defining product form , 2008 .

[5]  Vladimir Hubka,et al.  Practical Studies in Systematic Design , 1988 .

[6]  N. Cross.  Designerly ways of knowing , 2006 .

[7]  Shahriman Zainal Abidin,et al.  Practice-based design thinking for form development and detailing , 2012 .

[8]  Rusmadiah Anwar,et al.  Function means analysis for ablution concept solution , 2015 .

[9]  Andre Liem,et al.  UNDERSTANDING STYLING ACTIVITY OF AUTOMOTIVE DESIGNERS: A STUDY OF MANUAL INTERPOLATIVE MORPHING THROUGH FREEHAND SKETCHING , 2011 .

[10]  Hernan Casakin,et al.  Metaphors in Design Problem Solving: Implications for Creativity , 2007 .

[11]  N. H. Johari,et al.  Design framework of ceramic ablution Tub , 2012, 2012 IEEE Symposium on Business, Engineering and Industrial Applications.

[12]  L. B. Archer,et al.  Systematic method for designers , 1963 .

[13]  Charles L. Owen,et al.  Design research: building the knowledge base☆ , 1998 .

[14]  Shahriman Zainal Abidin,et al.  The embodied mind in relation to thinking about form development , 2008 .

[15]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  A process-based approach to computer-supported engineering design , 1994 .

[16]  Rianne Valkenburg.  Shared understanding as a condition for team design , 1998 .

[17]  Paul Hekkert,et al.  Source Selection in Product Metaphor Generation: The Effects of Salience and Relatedness , 2014 .

[18]  S. Vereza.  Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought , 2001 .

[19]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design , 1994 .

[20]  Rusmadiah Anwar,et al.  A Framework of Empirical Study Through Design Practice for Industrial Ceramic Sanitary Ware Design , 2015 .

[21]  Rusmadiah Anwar,et al.  A Pattern in Formgiving Design: Giving Priority to a Principle Solution in Industrial Design Situation , 2015 .

[22]  Despina Christoforidou,et al.  Thinking and re-thinking Verbal Protocol Analysis in Design Research , 2009 .

[23]  Stuart Pugh,et al.  Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering , 1991 .

[24]  Anders Warell.  Design Syntactics: A Functional Approach to Visual Product Form – Theory, Models, and Methods , 2001 .

[25]  Brigitte Moench,et al.  Engineering Design A Systematic Approach , 2016 .

[26]  R. Anwar,et al.  Understanding methodological solution in design situation of novice designer , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL).

[27]  Nigan Bayazit,et al.  Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research , 2004, Design Issues.

[28]  Andre Liem,et al.  On the Role of Formgiving in Design , 2008 .

[29]  Stuart Pugh,et al.  Creating Innovative Products Using Total Design , 1996 .