Sandeep Krishnakumar, Cynthia Letting, Erin Johnson, Nicolas F. Soria Zurita, Jessica Menold
{"title":"制作还是绘制?调查草图和原型之间的沟通权衡","authors":"Sandeep Krishnakumar, Cynthia Letting, Erin Johnson, Nicolas F. Soria Zurita, Jessica Menold","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Make it or draw it? Investigating the communicative trade-offs between sketches and prototypes\",\"authors\":\"Sandeep Krishnakumar, Cynthia Letting, Erin Johnson, Nicolas F. Soria Zurita, Jessica Menold\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/dsj.2023.31\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Design Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Design Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.31\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Make it or draw it? Investigating the communicative trade-offs between sketches and prototypes
Abstract Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.