Patterns of Cortical Activation When Using Concept Generation Techniques of Brainstorming, Morphological Analysis, and TRIZ

Shealy, Tripp; Hu, Mo; Gero, John S.

doi:10.1115/detc2018-86272

Cited by 19 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alternative ideation methods are dealt with by Shealy et al (2018), whose experiment is supported by the use of an fNIRS helmet, which measures blood oxygenation in the prefrontal cortex. Participants face a design task without methodological support (individual brainstorming), using morphological analysis and TRIZ; the three conditions are clearly featured by different levels of methods' structuredness.…”

Section: Focus On Methods Relevant To Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research

Borgianni

Maccioni

2020

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractDesign is inherently affected by human-related factors and it is of no surprise that the fine-tuning of instruments capable of measuring aspects of human behavior has attracted interest in the design field. The recalled instruments include a variety of devices that capture and quantitatively assess people's unintentional and unconscious reactions and that are generally referred as neurophysiological or biometric. The number of experimental applications of these instruments in design was extremely limited as of 2016, when Lohmeyer and Meboldt published a first report on relevant measures and their interpretation in design. In the last few years, the number of relevant publications has increased dramatically and this determines the opportunity to carry out a comprehensive review in the field. The reviewed contributions are analyzed and classified according to, among others, instruments used, the kind of stakeholders involved and the supported design research activities. The role of biometric measures with respect to traditional research methods is emphasized too. The discussed instruments can represent supports or substitutes for traditional approaches, as well as they are capable of exploring phenomena that could not be addressed hitherto. The intensity of research concerning experiments with biometric measurements is discussed too; a particular focus of the final discussion is the individuation of obstacles that prevent them from becoming commonplace in design research.

show abstract

Section: Focus On Methods Relevant To Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research

Borgianni

Maccioni

2020

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fNIRS measurement involves a much less expensive device than fMRI. Design neurocognition studies using fNIRS explored concept generation using three different idea generation methods (Shealy et al 2018;Shealy & Gero 2019) and analyzed differences in design cognition based on expertise .…”

Section: Fnirs: Measuring Changes In Brain Behavior For Different Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent studies focused on designers' physiological signals such as eye movements, electrodermal activity (EDA; this corresponds to the activation of sweat glands in the skin) or heart rate variability (HRV; this is the variation in the interval between two heart beats) while performing a design task (Sun et al 2014;Leinikka et al 2016;Yu & Gero 2018). Techniques from neuroscience to analyze brain behavior during design thinking processes offer ways to better understand human behavior while designing (Alexiou et al 2009;Shealy, Hu & Gero 2018). The interest in using new methods from other research fields provides opportunities to better understand designers' cognitive processes while designing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for studying design thinking through measuring designers’ minds, bodies and brains

Gero

Milovanovic

2020

Des. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a framework for studying design thinking. Three paradigmatic approaches are described to measure design cognitive processes: design cognition, design physiology and design neurocognition. Specific tools and methods serve each paradigmatic approach. Design cognition is explored through protocol analysis, black-box experiments, surveys and interviews. Design physiology is measured with eye tracking, electrodermal activity, heart rate and emotion tracking. Design neurocognition is measured using electroencephalography, functional near infrared spectroscopy and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Illustrative examples are presented to describe the types of results each method provides about the characteristics of design thinking, such as design patterns, design reasoning, design creativity, design collaboration, the co-evolution of the problem solution space, or design analysis and evaluation. The triangulation of results from the three paradigmatic approaches to studying design thinking provides a synergistic foundation for the understanding of design cognitive processes. Results from such studies generate a source of feedback to designers, design educators and researchers in design science. New models, new tools and new research questions emerge from the integrated approach proposed and lay down future challenges in studying design thinking.

show abstract

“…EEG), which are becoming increasingly popular in design research (e.g. Shealy, Hu, and Gero 2018;Goucher-Lambert, Moss, and Cagan 2019;Hay et al 2019). More generally, AEDI may be useful in any empirical investigation of ideation employing open-ended design problems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A novel systematic approach for analysing exploratory design ideation

Hay

Duffy

Grealy

et al. 2019

Journal of Engineering Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two kinds of design ideation process may be distinguished in terms of the problems addressed: (i) solution-focused, i.e. generating solutions to address a fixed problem specifying a desired output; and (ii) exploratory, i.e. considering different interpretations of an openended problem and generating associated solutions. Existing systematic analysis approaches focus on the former; the literature is lacking such an approach for the latter. In this paper, we provide a means to systematically analyse exploratory ideation for the first time through a new approach: Analysis of Exploratory Design Ideation (AEDI). AEDI involves: (1) open-ended ideation tasks; (2) coding of explored problems and solutions from sketches; and (3) evaluating ideation performance based on coding. We applied AEDI to 812 concept sketches from 19 open-ended tasks completed during a neuroimaging study of 30 professional product design engineers. Results demonstrate that the approach provides: (i) consistent tasks that stimulate problem exploration; (ii) a reliable means of coding explored problems and solutions; and (iii) an appropriate way to rank/compare designers' performance. AEDI enables the benefits of systematic analysis (e.g. greater comparability, replicability, and efficiency) to be realised in exploratory ideation research, and studies using open-ended problems more generally. Future improvements include increasing coding validity and reliability.

show abstract

Patterns of Cortical Activation When Using Concept Generation Techniques of Brainstorming, Morphological Analysis, and TRIZ

Cited by 19 publications

References 32 publications

Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research

Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research

A framework for studying design thinking through measuring designers’ minds, bodies and brains

A novel systematic approach for analysing exploratory design ideation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About