1989
DOI: 10.2307/1511517
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Categorization... Natural Language and Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The work that is reported incorporates the critical design theory of Athavankar [6], who highlights the importance for product designers of designing products whose form shows its "belongingness" to the intended category of product so that it may be recognized as a legitimate member of that group. Furthermore, work by Labov [7], illustrates the connection between the variations in product form and in conceptual meaning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The work that is reported incorporates the critical design theory of Athavankar [6], who highlights the importance for product designers of designing products whose form shows its "belongingness" to the intended category of product so that it may be recognized as a legitimate member of that group. Furthermore, work by Labov [7], illustrates the connection between the variations in product form and in conceptual meaning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The theories suggest that people have conceptual and categorical beliefs about the objects that they experience, which they refer to when they encounter other objects (Norman, 2013;Athavankar, 1989). Through experiences with real objects in everyday life, a person will establish and hold some presupposed beliefs about properties that do and do not co-occur (Anderson, 2015;Schifferstein and Hekkert, 2008). The person will build mental models of concepts upon existing beliefs as well as inferences from information identified in the product itself (Norman, 2013;Burnston and Cohen, 2012).…”
Section: Coherence Is Perceptualmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We recognise meaningful objects from meaningless lowlevel features of information through forming patterns in both bottom-up and top-down strategies of our cognition (Ware, 2008). Evidence also shows it is possible to imagine an object's semantic property in archetypal categories of existing objects effortlessly, even if only very small portions of the object are seen (Athavankar, 1989). These facts imply that we are inherently capable of finding out more meaning in incomplete information of an object.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%