Impact of Design Representations on Creativity of Design Outcomes

G. Cascini, Lorenzo Fiorineschi, F. Rotini
{"title":"Impact of Design Representations on Creativity of Design Outcomes","authors":"G. Cascini, Lorenzo Fiorineschi, F. Rotini","doi":"10.3233/JID180012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Designers usually spend non-negligible efforts in performing comprehensive design space explorations, but important information exchanged in conceptual design sessions is often lost, even about the rationale behind preferred solutions. As a part of a broader investigation concerning the impact of knowledge coming from previously performed design tasks, this paper describes an experiment aimed at assessing the impact on the design outcomes of two representations used to share existing design information. In particular, the authors compared a function structure, together with a morphological chart, against a hierarchically organized tree of problems and solutions. The design experiment has been performed with a sample composed by 35 engineering students, which have been opportunely subdivided in three groups. The experiment has been structured in three phases and acknowledged literature metrics for assessing idea generation effectiveness have been applied to assess the design outcomes produced by students. Obtained results show that providing information with the two investigated representations leads to potential advantages in terms of Variety of devised concepts. Moreover, additional analysis of the results highlighted that the considered representations led to different idea-generation paths.","PeriodicalId":342559,"journal":{"name":"J. Integr. Des. Process. Sci.","volume":"77 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Integr. Des. Process. Sci.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/JID180012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Designers usually spend non-negligible efforts in performing comprehensive design space explorations, but important information exchanged in conceptual design sessions is often lost, even about the rationale behind preferred solutions. As a part of a broader investigation concerning the impact of knowledge coming from previously performed design tasks, this paper describes an experiment aimed at assessing the impact on the design outcomes of two representations used to share existing design information. In particular, the authors compared a function structure, together with a morphological chart, against a hierarchically organized tree of problems and solutions. The design experiment has been performed with a sample composed by 35 engineering students, which have been opportunely subdivided in three groups. The experiment has been structured in three phases and acknowledged literature metrics for assessing idea generation effectiveness have been applied to assess the design outcomes produced by students. Obtained results show that providing information with the two investigated representations leads to potential advantages in terms of Variety of devised concepts. Moreover, additional analysis of the results highlighted that the considered representations led to different idea-generation paths.
设计表征对设计成果创造性的影响
设计师通常会花费不可忽视的精力进行全面的设计空间探索,但在概念设计会议上交换的重要信息往往会丢失,甚至是关于首选解决方案背后的基本原理。作为关于来自先前执行的设计任务的知识影响的更广泛调查的一部分,本文描述了一个旨在评估用于共享现有设计信息的两种表示对设计结果的影响的实验。特别地,作者比较了一个功能结构,连同一个形态图,与一个分层组织的问题和解决方案的树。设计实验是由35名工科学生组成的样本进行的,这些学生被适当地分为三组。实验分为三个阶段,公认的评估创意产生有效性的文献指标已被应用于评估学生产生的设计成果。得到的结果表明,提供信息与调查的两种表示导致潜在的优势,在各种设计的概念。此外,对结果的进一步分析强调,考虑的表征导致了不同的想法产生路径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信