The Effects of Representation Mode on Conceptual Coherence in the Design of Physical Products

Coherence is important in the design of products, because it makes them easier to understand for their users. Designers can use different representation modes to express ideas about coherence. However, perception of a representation can be influenced by its mode. Therefore, designers must be aware of the influences that different representation modes can have on perception of coherence. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of experienced modality on perception of conceptual coherence. In the study, participants were divided into two conditions for two representation modes: written word and physical object, both representing the same concepts. Each participant was presented with the concepts as words or objects and asked to list the properties of each concept. The results showed that between the two conditions, frequencies of responses were similar while frequencies of response contents were dissimilar and sometimes contrary. The main findings suggest that the effects of the modalities, written word and physical object, do not differ significantly for mental activity, but do differ considerably for semantic processing in ways that has implications for design.

[1]  Mitzi M. Montoya,et al.  Form and Function: A Matter of Perspective , 2011 .

[2]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[3]  J. Tanaka,et al.  Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder? , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Paul Ginns.  Meta-Analysis of the Modality Effect. , 2005 .

[5]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  Feature Centrality and Conceptual Coherence , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  G. Murphy.  Parts in object concepts: Experiments with artificial categories , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[7]  M. L. Lambon Ralph,et al.  Conceptual Structure within and between Modalities , 2012, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[8]  Margot Brereton,et al.  Distributed Cognition in Engineering Design: Negotiating between abstract and material representations , 2004 .

[9]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[10]  D L Medin,et al.  Concepts and conceptual structure. , 1989, The American psychologist.

[11]  Daniel Bowman.  Effective Product Platform Planning in the Front End , 2006 .

[12]  S. Thomke,et al.  Agile Product Development: Managing Development Flexibility in Uncertain Environments , 1998 .

[13]  John K. Gershenson,et al.  Product modularity: Definitions and benefits , 2003 .

[14]  P. Hekkert,et al.  'Most advanced, yet acceptable': typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[15]  Hendrik N.J. Schifferstein,et al.  Tools Facilitating Multi-sensory Product Design , 2008 .

[16]  Uday Athavankar.  Categorization... Natural Language and Design , 1989 .

[17]  Leilei Yin,et al.  Engineering Product and Process Design Changes: A Literature Overview☆ , 2016 .

[18]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Form versus Function: How the Intensities of Specific Emotions Evoked in Functional versus Hedonic Trade-Offs Mediate Product Preferences , 2007 .

[20]  Sara J. Unsworth,et al.  Cultural Influences on Categorization Processes , 2005 .

[21]  P. John Clarkson,et al.  Representing Artefacts as Media: Modelling the Relationship Between Designer Intent and Consumer Experience , 2008 .

[22]  S. Vosniadou.  Mental Models in Conceptual Development , 2002 .

[23]  Moray Kidd,et al.  Engineering design change management , 2000 .