A Theoretical Approach to Intuition in Design: Does Design Methodology Need to Account for Unconscious Processes?

Design theory is the body of knowledge that provides an understanding of the principles, practices, and procedures of design. That knowledge leads to hypotheses on how designers should work, which constitute the basis of the prescriptive part of design methodology. Decision making is one of the central design activities, and has been predominantly conceptualized as a structured, explicit, and rational thinking process in the literature. From this knowledge, various decision support methods have been developed. However, there is rich empirical evidence highlighting unconscious and mainly inaccessible processes that allow the designer to make quick and often effective decisions without building on explicit rationale. Given designers construct, apply, and internalize knowledge in a variety of different situations and time frames in their daily work, advocating the use of explicit and structured processes in all situations seems unrealistic. This claim implies that comprehensive design theories need to take into account unconscious processes such as intuition. From a methodological perspective, design methods should acknowledge the designer’s need to rely on intuition in certain situations—especially under time pressure. At a more advanced level, design methods should support the designer in assessing the limitations and benefits of utilizing intuitive approaches. In order to broaden the mono-disciplinary view, it would be beneficial to utilize knowledge from other disciplines such as relevant findings of neurophysiological research on the processes of the unconscious. For instance, in the early 1990s, neurophysiologists identified a group of nerve cells that are responsible for transmitting a signal when the brain detects an error before the person is even aware of the error. Connecting this type of information with the world of the designer might lead to advances in how designers relate to and manage their own processes.

[1]  W. E. Eder,et al.  Theory of Technical Systems: A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design , 1988 .

[2]  S. Freud The Interpretation of Dreams , 1899 .

[3]  D. Kahneman A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[4]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Natural intelligence in design , 1999 .

[5]  K. Stanovich,et al.  Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[6]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[7]  Richard Dyde,et al.  Why do some perceptual illusions affect visually guided action, when others don't? , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[8]  Klaus Ehrlenspiel,et al.  Comparing designers from practice and designers with systematic design education , 1999 .

[9]  Willemien Visser,et al.  Design: One, but in different forms , 2007, ArXiv.

[10]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Expertise in Design: an overview , 2004 .

[11]  A. Einstein,et al.  Einstein and the Poet: In Search of the Cosmic Man , 1983 .

[12]  E. Sadler‐Smith,et al.  The Role of Intuition in Strategic Decision Making , 2009 .

[13]  Hubert L. Dreyfus,et al.  Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[14]  Markus Ullsperger,et al.  Surprise and Error: Common Neuronal Architecture for the Processing of Errors and Novelty , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  Jonathan Evans In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[16]  Erik Dane,et al.  Exploring Intuition and its Role in Managerial Decision Making , 2007 .

[17]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks , 2003 .

[18]  S. Sloman The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[20]  W. James,et al.  The Principles of Psychology. , 1983 .

[21]  E. B. Zechmeister,et al.  Research Methods in Psychology. , 1990 .

[22]  Vladimir Hubka,et al.  Theorie Technischer Systeme , 1984 .

[23]  Petra Badke-Schaub,et al.  Towards a Designer-Centred Methodology: Descriptive Considerations and Prescriptive Reflections , 2011 .

[24]  Herbert Birkhofer,et al.  The Future of Design Methodology , 2011 .

[25]  D. Schoen The Reflective Practitioner , 1983 .

[26]  Jonathan St. B. T. Evans,et al.  Questions and challenges for the new psychology of reasoning , 2012 .

[27]  Eugene Sadler-Smith,et al.  The Role of Intuition in Collective Learning and the Development of Shared Meaning , 2008 .

[28]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[29]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[30]  S. Freud The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , 1953 .

[31]  Jonathan Evans Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning , 1984 .

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

[33]  Gary Klein,et al.  The Power of Intuition: How to Use Your Gut Feelings to Make Better Decisions at Work , 2004 .

[34]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill Structured Problems , 1973, Artif. Intell..