Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
This chapter is based on the assumption that because designing (of tangible artifacts) is aimed at specifying configurations and properties of entities, designers must manipulate forms and shapes and they must resort to visual reasoning to do so. Visual reasoning in designing is seen as the interplay between two modes of reasoning: embodiment and rationale, such that the one supports and continues the other in order to arrive at a result that is novel and valid in terms of all the requirements it is to satisfy. We use protocol analysis to explore the bond between embodiment and rationale reasoning modes at two levels of cognitive operation – that of the design move and that of the argument that is its building block. We conclude that the two modes of reasoning are equi-present in designing; they describe a binary system characterized by high-frequency shifts between embodiment and rationale.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Akin, Ö., & Lin, C. (1996). Design protocol data and novel design decisions. In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds.), Analysing design activity (pp. 35–64). Chichester: Wiley.
Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Argiris, C. (1981). Teaching and learning in design settings. In W. L. Porter & M. Kilbridge (Eds.), Architecture education study (pp. 551–660). New York: Consortium of East Coast Schools of Architecture/Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.
Ball, L., Lambell, N., Ormerod, T., Slavin, S., & Mariani, J. (2001). Representing design rationale to support innovative design reuse: A minimalist approach. Automation in Construction, 10, 663–674. CrossRef
Baya, V. (1996). Information handling behavior of designers during conceptual design: three experiments. PhD dissertation, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford.
Block, N. (1981). Imagery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cross, N. (1997). Creativity in design: Analyzing and modeling the creative leap. Leonardo, 30(4), 311–317. CrossRef
Cross, N. (2006). The designerly ways of knowing. London: Springer.
Cross, N., Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. (Eds.). (1996). Analyzing design activity. Chichester: Wiley.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437. CrossRef
Ericsson, K.A., & Simon, H.A. (1984/1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fish, J. (2004). Cognitive catalysis: Sketches for a time-lagged brain. In G. Goldschmidt & W. L. Porter (Eds.), Design representation (pp. 151–184). London: Springer. CrossRef
Fish, J., & Scrivener, S. (1990). Amplifying the mind’s eye: Sketching and visual cognition. Leonardo, 23, 117–126. CrossRef
Ganis, G., Thompson, W. L., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2004). Brain areas underlying visual mental imagery and visual perception: An fMRI study. Cognitive Brain Research, 20, 226–241. CrossRef
Gero, J. S., & McNeill, T. (1998). Analysis of design protocols. Design Studies, 19(1), 21–61. CrossRef
Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123–143. CrossRef
Goldschmidt, G. (1996). The designer as a team of one. In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds.), Analysing design activity (pp. 65–91). Chichester: Wiley.
Goldschmidt, G. (1997). Capturing indeterminism: Representation in the design problem space. Design Studies, 18(4), 441–455. CrossRef
Goldschmidt, G. (2003). The backtalk of self-generated sketches. Design Issues, 19(1), 72–88. CrossRef
Goldschmidt, G., & Tatsa, D. (2005). How good are good ideas? Correlates of design creativity. Design Studies, 26(6), 593–611. CrossRef
Goldschmidt, G., & Weil, M. (1998). Contents and structure in design reasoning. Design Issues, 14(3), 85–100. CrossRef
Habraken, N. J. (1985). The appearance of the form. Cambridge, MA: Awater Press.
Kan, J. W. T., & Gero, J. S. (2008). Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designing. Design Studies, 29(4), 315–337. CrossRef
Kosslyn, S. M. (1996). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Linhares, A., Freitas, A. E. T. A., Mendes, A., & Silva, J. S. (2012). Entanglement of perception and reasoning in the combinatorial game of chess: Differential errors of strategic reconstruction. Cognitive Systems Research, 13, 72–86. CrossRef
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldman, J., & Grote, K. H. (2007). Engineering design: A systematic approach (3rd ed.). London: Springer.
Purcell, T., Gero, J. S., Edwards, H., & McNeill, T. (1996). The data in design protocols: The issue of data coding, data analysis in the development of models of the design process. In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds.), Analysing design activity (pp. 225–252). Chichester: Wiley.
Rosenman, M. A., & Gero, J. S. (1993). Creativity in design using a design prototype approach. In J. S. Gero & M.-L. Maher (Eds.), Modeling creativity and knowledge-based creative design (pp. 11–138). Hillsdal: Erlbaum.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D. A. (1984). Problems, frames and perspectives on designing. Design Studies, 5(3), 132–136. CrossRef
Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201. CrossRef
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3–22. CrossRef
Stern, J. (2000). Metaphor in context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1996). What architects see in their design sketches: implications for design tools. In Human factors in computing systems, in CHI’96 conference companion (pp. 191–192). New York: ACM. CrossRef
Tye, M. (1991). The imagery debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
van der Lugt, R. (2000). Developing a graphic tool for creative problem solving in design groups. Design Studies, 21(5), 505–522. CrossRef
Woodbury, R. F., & Burrow, A. L. (2006). Whither design space? AIEDAM, 20, 63–82.
- A Micro View of Design Reasoning: Two-Way Shifts Between Embodiment and Rationale
- Springer London
- Chapter 3