Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Approach to Develop Designer-Centred Methods: Illustrated by an Example on How to Overcome Cognitive Bias in Product Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design Methodology for Future Products

Abstract

Although the designer has been recognized to have a particularly important role in product development, design method development still shows a lack of putting the designer in the focus. This contribution presents an approach to develop designer-centred methods in three steps: Assessment of designer thinking, design method synthesis and design method validation. To illustrate the approach, the development of a design method to overcome cognitive bias in product development is presented using the approach. Cognitive biases are systematic deviations from rational decisions that lead to illogical interpretations of information or data. By taking cognitive bias and designer thinking into consideration, data driven design can be better supported. The method development here addresses the confirmation bias, a particularly difficult bias. With the Design-ACH, a method is presented that supports design engineers in reducing the confirmation bias, which is shown by results of multiple studies. Implications for future development of designer-centred methods include data driven method development, which can be made possible by automated quantitative measurement of designer thinking. Also, there is a need for studies in both laboratory and field to ensure designer-centred method development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The results of the laboratory study were published in Nelius et al. (2020).

  2. 2.

    The results of the laboratory study were published in Nelius et al. (2020).

  3. 3.

    The method development was published Nelius et al. (2021b).

  4. 4.

    The results of the laboratory evaluation study were published in Nelius and Matthiesen (2019).

  5. 5.

    The results of the case study were published in Nelius et al. (2021b).

References

  • Albers A, Braun A (2011) A generalised framework to compass and to support complex product engineering processes. Int J Prod Dev (IJPD) 15(1/2/3):6–25. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2011.043659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badke-Schaub P, Daalhuizen J, Roozenburg N (2011) Towards a designer-centred methodology: descriptive considerations and prescriptive reflections. In: Birkhofer H (ed) The future of design methodology. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender B, Reinicke T, Wünsche T, Blessing LTM (2002) Application of methods from social sciences in design research. In: DS 30: proceedings of DESIGN 2002, the 7th international design conference, Dubrovnik, pp 7–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Blessing LTM, Chakrabarti A (2009) DRM, a design research methodology. Springer, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bursac N, Rapp S, Albers A, Breitschuh J, Tanaiutchawoot N (2017) Entscheidungsheuristiken in der PGE – Produktgenerationsentwicklung. In: Krause D, Paetzold K, Wartzack S (eds) DFX 2017: proceedings of the 28th Symposium design for X, 4-5 October 2017, Bamberg, Germany: Beiträge zum 28. DfX-Symposium, Oktober 2017. Tutech Verlag, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Bursac N, Tanaiutchawoot N, Rapp S, Albers A, Breitschuh J, Eckert C (2018) Decision heuristics in PGE – product generation engineering. In: Horváth I, Suárez Rivero JP, Hernández Castellano PM (eds) Proceedings of TMCE 2018, 7–11 may, 2018, Las Palmas de gran Canaria, gran Canaria, Spain. TU Delft, Delft, pp 385–394

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlenspiel K (2020) Das Wechselspiel zwischen Unbewusstem und Rationalität in der Produktentwicklung. In: Corves B, Gericke K, Grote K-H, Lohrengel A, Löwer M, Nagarajah A, Rieg F, Scharr G, Stelzer R (eds) 18. Gemeinsames Kolloquium Konstruktionstechnik 2020: Nachhaltige Produktentwicklung: KT 2020. DuEPublico, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany, Essen, pp 1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenmann M, Matthiesen S (2020) Identifying reasons for a lack of method application in engineering design practice – an interview study. In: DESIGN 2020, vol 1. Design society, pp 2495–2504

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer RJ (1999) Psychology of intelligence analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohmeyer Q, Meboldt M (2016) The integration of quantitative biometric measures and experimental design research. In: Cash P, Stanković T, Štorga M (eds) Experimental design research. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 97–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Marxen L, Albers A (2012) Supporting validation in the development of design methods. In: DESIGN 2012. Design society

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthiesen S (2021) Gestaltung – Prozess und Methoden. In: Bender B, Gericke K (eds) Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre, vol 22, 9th edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 397–465

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Matthiesen S, Nelius T, Schmidt S, Cersowsky S, Schneider T (2016) Entwicklungssimulator – Erleben von Problemsituationen zur Steigerung der Methodenakzeptanz. In: Kammasch G (ed) Anwendungsorientierung und Wissenschaftsorientierung in der Ingenieurbildung Wege zu technischer Bildung: Referate der 10. Ingenieurpädagogischen Regionaltagung 2015 an der Fontys University of Applied Sciences 5.-7. November 2015, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelius T, Matthiesen S (2019) Experimental evaluation of a Debiasing method for analysis in engineering design. In: Wartzack S, Schleich B (eds) DS 94: proceedings of the design society: 22nd international conference on engineering design (ICED19). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 489–498

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelius T, Doellken M, Zimmerer C, Matthiesen S (2020) The impact of confirmation bias on reasoning and visual attention during analysis in engineering design: an eye tracking study. Des Stud 71:100963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelius T, Eisenmann M, Grauberger P, Matthiesen S (2021a) Tatort Technik (Teil 1) – Herausforderungen bei der Problemanalyse in der Konstruktion. Konstruktion 73(3):70–74. https://doi.org/10.37544/0720-5953-2021-03-70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelius T, Eisenmann M, Grauberger P, Matthiesen S (2021b) Tatort Technik (Teil 2) – Unterstützung bei der Problemanalyse in der Konstruktion mit der Design-ACH Methode. Konstruktion 73(4):70–74. https://doi.org/10.37544/0720-5953-2021-04-70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neroni MA, Vasconcelos LA, Crilly N (2017) Computer-based “mental set” tasks: an alternative approach to studying design fixation. J Mech Des 139:071102-1-071102-10. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036562

  • Nickerson, RS (1998) Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol 2(2):175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omidvarkarjan D, Conrad J, Herbst C, Klahn C, Meboldt M (2020) Bender – an educational game for teaching agile hardware development. Procedia Manufacturing 45:313–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pottebaum J, Gräßler I (2020) Informationsqualität in der Produktentwicklung: Modellbasiertes systems engineering mit expliziter Berücksichtigung von Unsicherheit/information quality in product engineering: model-based systems engineering in explicit consideration of uncertainty. Konstruktion 72(11–12):76–83. https://doi.org/10.37544/0720-5953-2020-11-12-76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaiutchawoot N, Bursac N, Rapp S, Albers A (2019) Investigating the influence of the decoy effect in pairwise comparison in terms of idea selection in the product development process. Proc Int Conf Eng Des 1(1):1195–1204. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üreten S, Eisenmann M, Nelius T, Cao S, Matthiesen S, Krause D (2019) A concept map for design method experiments in product development – a guideline for method developers. In: DFX2019. Design society

    Google Scholar 

  • Üreten S, Eisenmann M, Nelius T, Garrelts E, Krause D, Matthiesen S (2020) Current challenges and solution approaches in empirical engineering design research – a workshop for empirical research. In: DESIGN 2020, vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 61–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf J, Hess S, Meboldt M, Lohmeyer Q, Bachmann D (2018) Automating areas of interest analysis in mobile eye tracking experiments based on machine learning. J Eye Mov Res 11:1–11. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.11.6.6

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), IPEK – Institute of Product Engineering, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Sven Matthiesen, Thomas Nelius & Matthias Eisenmann

Authors
  1. Sven Matthiesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Nelius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthias Eisenmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Matthiesen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Board Member of the Scientific Society for Product Development (WiGeP), Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Product Development and Mechanical Engineering Design (PKT), Hamburg, Germany

    Dieter Krause

  2. Assistant to the Board of the Scientific Society for Product Development (WiGeP), Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Product Development and Mechanical Engineering Design (PKT), Hamburg, Germany

    Emil Heyden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Matthiesen, S., Nelius, T., Eisenmann, M. (2022). An Approach to Develop Designer-Centred Methods: Illustrated by an Example on How to Overcome Cognitive Bias in Product Development. In: Krause, D., Heyden, E. (eds) Design Methodology for Future Products. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78368-6_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78368-6_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78367-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78368-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation