How Is Innovation Influenced by Logic, Emotion and Representation?

Innovation plays a significant role in the knowledge-based economy for a nation. Based on the design creativity theory proposed by Nguyen and Zeng (Nguyen and Zeng, 2012), the designer’s innovation in dealing with a design problem depends on the designer’s stress level, which further relies on the cognitive workload perceived by the designer and the designer’s capabilities. The designer’s capability is defined by his/her knowledge and logical reasoning abilities to understand and solve the design problem as well as his/her emotional capability to cope with the stress arisen during the design process. A designer could be more creative and innovative if the designer’s mental stress is kept at a medium level. Nguyen and Zeng (Nguyen and Zeng, 2017) analysed how design tools may contribute to the use of proper design knowledge in improving the creativity and novelty of the final design solutions. Zeng et al. (Zeng et al., 2004) indicated that sketching as a design tool would help designers be more creative by releasing their cognitive workload. In this special issue, four papers are selected to cover the four aspects that affect designers’ capabilities to be creative and innovative. The first paper, by Tianqun Pan and titled “Technological Innovation: A Balance between Indispensability and Feasibility”, aims to explore the designer’s reasoning in technological innovation by using modal logic. A technology is described as a set of action propositions whereas a technological innovation is regarded to form a new set of such propositions. An action proposition can be roughly viewed as a function or affordance, which are widely used in the design research community (Chakrabarti and Bligh, 2001; Gero and Kannengiesser, 2007; Hirtz et al., 2002; Maier and Fadel, 2009; Umeda et al., 1990). An action proposition is indispensable if regarded as necessary no matter how the technology involved is innovated. An action proposition is feasible if workable but replaceable in terms of achieving some effect(s). Hence, an indispensable action is more or less the function or affordance that a technology must deliver certain effect(s) (e.g. satisfying natural laws) while a feasible action can be seen as one of the alternative solutions to achieve an effect (e.g. satisfying human needs). The interaction between the indispensable and feasible actions constitute the recursive logic of design (Zeng and Cheng, 1991). Thus, a technological innovation constitutes a balance between indispensability and feasibility. Logics containing the operators of indispensability and feasibility are then used to draw inferences regarding technological innovation. The second paper, by Stephen Ekwaro-Osire and Joao Paulo Dias and titled “Function and Aesthetics of a Product in Segmentation of the Sketch”, aims to segment product sketches by considering the central characteristics of product design. The segmentation of design sketches can support the capturing of design rationale, which can be used as knowledge for future design projects. One important criterion for this