Understanding Cognitive Activities in Parametric Design

  • Ju Hyun Lee
  • Ning Gu
  • Michael J. Ostwald
  • Julie Jupp
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 369)

Abstract

Parametric design offers a new paradigm in the field of Computer-Aided Design; a paradigm focused on the potential for producing design variations. However, despite this potential, the cognitive activities associated with parametric design are not well understood. The authors of this paper present a formal method for capturing cognitive activities via protocol analysis. To support the interpretation of this method, this paper evaluates creativity implicit in design products by way of a consensual assessment technique. The findings identify two cognitive activities (‘making generation’ and ‘changing existing parameters’) as potential critical to divergent thinking and the restructuring of design components. These activities facilitate the generative aspects of parametric design. The paper concludes with a discussion of three cognitive levels (physical, perceptual and conceptual) that support an understanding of cognitive activities in parametric design.

Keywords

Parametric design CAD Cognitive activity Protocol analysis Consensual assessment technique 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Blosiu, J.O.: Use of synectics as an idea seeding technique to enhance design creativity. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, IEEE SMC 1999 (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim, Y.S., Kang, B.G.: Personal Characteristics and Design-Related Performances in a Creative Engineering Design Course. In: Proceedings of the 6th Asian Design Conference, Tsukuba, Japan (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lawson, B.: CAD and Creativity: Does the Computer Really Help? Leonardo 35, 327–331 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gero, J.S.: Creativity, emergence and evolution in design. Knowledge-Based Systems 9, 435–448 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, J.Y., Kim, K.: Geometric reasoning for knowledge-based parametric design using graph representation. Computer-Aided Design 28, 831–841 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jones, J.C.: Design methods. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boulanger, S., Smith, I.: Multi-strategy workspace navigation for design education. Design Studies 22, 111–140 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, J.H., Gu, N., Jupp, J., Sherratt, S.: Towards a formal evaluation of creativity in parametric design process: a pilot study. In: Design Research Society, DRS 2012, Bangkok, Thailand (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, J.H., Gu, N., Jupp, J., Sherratt, S.: Evaluating Creativity in Parametric Design Processes and Products: A Pilot Study. In: Design Computing and Cognition, DCC 2012, Texas, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Verstijnen, I.M., Van Leeuwen, C., Goldschmidt, G., Hamel, R., Hennessey, J.M.: Sketching and creative discovery. Design Studies 19, 519–546 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Akin, O., Moustapha, H.: Strategic use of representation in architectural massing. Design Studies 25, 31–50 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Casakin, H., Kreitler, S.: The cognitive profile of creativity in design. Thinking Skills and Creativity 6, 159–168 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chai, K.-H., Xiao, X.: Understanding design research: A bibliometric analysis of Design Studies (1996-2010). Design Studies 33, 24–43 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bilda, Z., Demirkan, H.: An insight on designers’ sketching activities in traditional versus digital media. Design Studies 24, 27–50 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ibrahim, R., Rahimian, F.P.: Comparison of CAD and manual sketching tools for teaching architectural design. Automation in Construction 19, 978–987 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salim, F.D., Burry, J.: Software Openness: Evaluating Parameters of Parametric Modeling Tools to Support Creativity and Multidisciplinary Design Integration. In: Taniar, D., Gervasi, O., Murgante, B., Pardede, E., Apduhan, B.O. (eds.) ICCSA 2010, Part III. LNCS, vol. 6018, pp. 483–497. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sanderson, S.W.: Cost models for evaluating virtual design strategies in multicycle product families. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 8, 339–358 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Christiaans, H.H.C.M.: Creativity as a Design Criterion. Creativity Research Journal 14, 41–54 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dorst, K.: Analysing design activity: new directions in protocol analysis. Design Studies 16, 139–142 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Suwa, M., Purcell, T., Gero, J.S.: Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions. Design Studies 19, 455–483 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gero, J.S., Neill, T.M.: An approach to the analysis of design protocols. Design Studies 19, 21–61 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Iordanova, I.: Teaching Digital Design Exploration: Form Follows. International Journal of Architectural Computing 5, 685–702 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wallas, G.: The Art of Thought. Harcourt Brace, New York (1926)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Paton, B., Dorst, K.: Briefing and reframing: A situated practice. Design Studies 32, 573–587 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ahmed, S., Wallace, K.M., Blessing, L.M.: Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design 14, 1 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bilda, Z., Gero, J.S.: The impact of working memory limitations on the design process during conceptualization. Design Studies 28, 343–367 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Holzer, D., Hough, R., Burry, M.: Parametric Design and Structural Optimisation for Early Design Exploration. International Journal of Architectural Computing 5, 625–643 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ju Hyun Lee
    • 1
  • Ning Gu
    • 1
  • Michael J. Ostwald
    • 1
  • Julie Jupp
    • 2
  1. 1.University of NewcastleNewcastleAustralia
  2. 2.University of Technology SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations