This paper argues that sequences of exploratory drawings - constructed by designer’s movements and decisions - trace systematic and logical paths from ideas to designs. This argument has three parts. First, sequences of exploratory sketches produced by product designers, against the same task specification, are analyzed in terms of the cognitive categories of reinterpretation, emergence and abstracttion. Second, a computational model is outlined for the process of exploration through drawing and third the model is applied to elucidate the logic in the sequences of exploratory sketches examined earlier.


Product Design Concept Design Exploration Process Design Exploration Conceptual Stage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akin, O: 2001, Variants in design cognition, in CM Eastman, WM McCracken and WC Newstetter (eds), Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, Elsevier, pp. 105–124.Google Scholar
  2. Arnheim, R: 1966, Towards a Psychology of Art, Faber and Faber, London, UK.Google Scholar
  3. Arnheim, R: 1974, Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Ching, FDK: 1998, Design Drawing, John Wiley, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  5. Cross, N: 1994, Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design, John Wiley, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
  6. Do, EY and Gross, MD: 1996, Drawing as a means to design reasoning, Artificial Intelligence in Design, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  7. Ferguson, ES: 1992, Engineering and the Mind’s Eye, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  8. Gero, JS: 1996, Creativity, emergence and evolution in design, Knowledge-Based Systems 9(7): 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goel, V: 1995, Sketches of Thought, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  10. Goldschmidt, G: 1994, On visual design thinking: The vis kids of architecture, Design Studies 15(2): 158–174.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoover, SP and Rinderle, JR: 1991, Models and abstractions in design, Design Studies 12(4): 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kepes, G: 1944, Language of Vision, P Theobald, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  13. Knight, TW: 2003a, Computing with emergence, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30: 125–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Knight, TW: 2003b, Computing with ambiguity, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30: 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kolarevic, B: 1997, Designing with regulating lines and geometric relations, IDATER97, Loughborough University, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Kosslyn, SM: 1990, Mental imagery, in DN Osherson, SM Kosslyn and JM Hollerbach (eds), Visual Cognition and Action, The MIT Press, London, England 2: 73–97.Google Scholar
  17. Lawson, BR: 2004, What Designers Know, Architectural Press, London.Google Scholar
  18. Liu, YC and Bligh, T: 2003, Towards and‘ideal’approach for concept generation, Design Studies 24(4): 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McCormack, J and Cagan, J: 2004, Speaking the Buick language: Capturing, understanding, and exploring brand identity with shape grammars, Design Studies 25(1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McGown, A and Green, G: 1998, Visible ideas: Information patterns of conceptual sketch activity, Design Studies 19(4): 431–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prats, M and Jowers, I: 2004, Improving product design via a shape grammar tool, 8th International Design Conference (Design 2004), Dubrovnik, Croatia.Google Scholar
  22. Purcell, T and Gero, JS: 1998, Drawings and the design process, Design Studies 19(4): 389–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schön, DA: 1988, Designing: Rules, types and worlds, Design Studies 9(3): 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schön, DA and Wiggins, G: 1992, Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing, Design Studies 13(2): 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smithers, T: 2001, Is sketching an aid to memory or a kind of thinking?, in JS Gero, B Tversky and T Purcell (eds), Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design II, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, Australia: 165–176.Google Scholar
  26. Soufi, B and Edmonds, E: 1996, The cognitive basis of emergence: Implications for design support, Design Studies 17(4): 451–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stacey, M: 2005, Psychological challenges for the analysis of style, Leicester, De Montfort University: Internal Report. Google Scholar
  28. Stiny, G: 1980, Introduction to shape and shape grammars, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 7(3): 343–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stiny, G: 2006, Shape: Talking about Seeing and Doing, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  30. Stiny, G and Gips, J: 1972, Shape grammars and the generative specification of painting and sculpture, Proceedings of IFIP Congress 71, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 1460–1465.Google Scholar
  31. Suwa, M: 2005, Differentiation: Designers are more than being good at designing, in JS Gero and N Bonnardel (eds), Studying Designers ′05, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, pp. 33–38.Google Scholar
  32. Suwa, M and Gero, JS: 1999, Unexpected discoveries: How designers discover hidden features in sketches, in JS Gero and B Tversky (eds), Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, Australia, pp. 145–162.Google Scholar
  33. Suwa, M and Tversky, B: 2003, Constructive perception: A metacognitive skill for coordinating perception and conception, Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Meetings.Google Scholar
  34. Tversky, B: 2001, Spatial schemas in depictions, in M Gattis (eds), Spatial Schemas and Abstract Thought, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 79–111.Google Scholar
  35. Van Sommers, P: 1984, Drawing and Cognition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

    • 1
    • 1
  1. 1.The Open UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations