Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interrelations between Motivation, Creativity and Emotions in Design Thinking Processes – An Empirical Study Based on Regulatory Focus Theory

  • Conference paper
Design Creativity 2010

Abstract

Design thinking, here defined as a team-based innovation method, helps to deal with complex design problems by sustaining in-depth learning processes on problem perception and diverse solution paths. To carry out design thinking processes successfully, motivation is a central psychological aspect to ensure creativity of the project outcome. In this paper, we ask how motivation is affected by the design thinking process and how it is related to team member’s emotions throughout the process. We adopted regulatory focus theory to conceptualize motivational variables. Experience Sampling Method within a field study with two samples was used, investigating people’s motivation of setting and approaching goals throughout real-life design projects that used design thinking. Results of this study show that the different phases carried out in design thinking processes significantly impact motivation and emotions of the members of a design team.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Beckmann SL, Barry M, (2007) Innovation as a Learning Process – Embedded Design Thinking. Californian Management Review 50(1):25–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner J, Higgins ET, (2001) Regulatory focus theory: Implications for the study of emotions at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86(1):35–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown T, (2008) Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review 84–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross N, (2007) Designerly Ways of Knowing. Basel etc: Birkhäuser

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross N, Dorst K, Roozenburg N, (1992) Preface to Research in Design Thinking. In: Cross N, Dorst K, Roozenburg N. (eds.): Research in Design Thinking, Delft

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowe E, Higgins ET, (1997) Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decisionmaking. Organizational behavior and human decision processes 69(2):117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst K, (2006) Design Problems and Design Paradoxes. Design Issues 22(3) Summer:4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunne D, Martin R, (2006) Design Thinking and How It Will Change Management Education: An Interview and Discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education 5(4):512–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Falomir-Pichastor JM, Mugny G, Quiamzade A, Gabarrot F, (2008) Motivations underlying attitudes: Regulatory focus and majority versus minority support. European Journal of Social Psychology 38:587–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fay D, Urbach T, Möbus J, (2010) What motivates you right now? Development of a state-regulatory focus measure. Unpublished manuscript, University of Potsdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman-Barrett L, Barrett DJ, (2001) An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review 19(2):175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florack A, Hartmann J, (2007) Regulatory focus and investment decisions in small groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43:626–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Förster J, Friedman RS, Liberman N, (2004) Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking: Consequences for insight and creative cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 7(2):177–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Förster J, Higgins ET, (2005) How global versus local perception fits regulatory focus. Psychological Science 16(8):631–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freitas AL, Liberman N, Salovey P, Higgins ET, (2002) When to begin? Regulatory focus and initiating goal pursuit. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 28(1) :121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman RS, Förster J, (2001) The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81:1001–1013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frijda NH, (1988) The laws of emotion. American Psychologist 43(5):349–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hekter JM, Schmidt JA, Csikszentmihalyi M, (2007) Experience sampling method: measuring the quality of everyday life. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins ET, (1997) Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist 52:1280–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins ET, (1998) Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Psychology 30:1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins ET, Bond RN, Klein R, Strauman T, (1986) Selfdiscrepancies and emotional vulnerability: How magnitude, accessibility, and type of discrepancy influence affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(1):5–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins ET, Shah J, Friedman R, (1997) Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72(3): 515–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idson LC, Liberman N, Higgins ET, (2004) Imagining how you’d feel: The role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30(7):926–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krohne HW, Egloff B, Kohlemann C-W, Tausch A, (1996) Untersuchungen mit einer deutschen Version der „Positive and Negative Affect Schedule” (PANAS). Diagnostica 42(2):139–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson B, (2006) How Designers Think. Oxford: Architectural Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg T, Noweski C, Meinel C, (2010) Evolving Discourses on design thinking: how design cognition inspires meta-disciplinary creative collaboration. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research 8(1):31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagai Y, Noguchi I, (2003) An experimental study on the design thinking process started from difficult keywords: modelling the thinking process of creative design. Journal of Engineering Design 14(4):429–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen C, (2006) Design Thinking - Notes On Its Nature And Use. Design Research Quartlerly 1:2 December 16–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Plattner H, Meinel C, Weinberg U, (2009) Design Thinking. Munich: mi-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS, (2002) Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage

    Google Scholar 

  • Roney CJR, Higgins ET, Shah J, (1995) Goals and framing: How outcome focus influences motivation and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21:1151–1160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MR, (2007) Motivation and Emotion: A New Look and Approach for Two Reemerging Fields. Motivation and Emotion 31:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön DA, (1983) The Reflective Practitioner – How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Perseus Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg RJ, Lubart TI, (1999) The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In Sternberg RJ, (Ed.), Handbook of creativity 3–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A, (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54:1063–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Madeleine Kröper, Tilmann Lindberg & Christoph Meinel

  2. University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Madeleine Kröper & Doris Fay

Authors
  1. Madeleine Kröper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Doris Fay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tilmann Lindberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christoph Meinel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kobe University, Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, 657-8501, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan

    Toshiharu Taura

  2. School of Knowledge Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Asahidai 1-1, 923-1292, Nomi-city, Ishikawa, Japan

    Yukari Nagai

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kröper, M., Fay, D., Lindberg, T., Meinel, C. (2011). Interrelations between Motivation, Creativity and Emotions in Design Thinking Processes – An Empirical Study Based on Regulatory Focus Theory. In: Taura, T., Nagai, Y. (eds) Design Creativity 2010. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-224-7_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-224-7_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-223-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-224-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation