Abstract
Mind-sets are expected to influence the process of designing, which require designers to successfully integrate complex decision-making processes into good design solutions. The study reported here analyses whether differences in mind-sets shown by design students can influence their design processes and impact the quality of the design solutions that they produce. The considerations, design activities and quality of solutions that design students produced in response to a given design task are examined to make an inference of mind-sets in actual design situations. 45 undergraduate students majoring in industrial design filled in a questionnaire that assessed their mind-set, and engaged in a design task. Two general types of mindsets can be discerned empirically: discerning and opportunistic. Significant differences between design students with a discerning or opportunistic mind-set could be observed. Evidence for the cultivation of a discerning mind-set in designing is found. Building on these results, recommendations on how to potentially support design teaching and learning are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Badke-Schaub, P., & Buerschaper, C. (2001). Creativity and complex problem solving in the social context BT—Decision making: Social and creative dimensions. In C. M. Allwood & M. Selart (Eds.), (pp. 177–196). CHAP, Dordrecht: Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9827-9_9.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2001). Do people mean what they say? Implications for subjective survey data. American Economic Review, 91(2), 67–72. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.260131.
Broadbent, J. A., & Cross, N. (2003). Design education in the information age. Journal of Engineering Design, 14(4), 439–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820310001606867.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637.
Casakin, H., & Kreitler, S. (2011). The cognitive profile of creativity in design. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(3), 159–168. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187118711100040X.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrisson, K. (Eds.). (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed., Vol. 253). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.3108/beej.10.r1.
Corno, L., & Anderman, E. M. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed.). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Educational-Psychology/dp/0415894824. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3(4), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0.
Cross, N. (1990). The nature and nurture of design ability. Design Studies, 11(3), 127–140. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0142694X9090002T.
Dean, D. L., Hender, J. M., Rodgers, T. L., & Santanen, E. L. (2006). Identifying quality, novel, and creative ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(10), 646–698.
Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.5.451.
Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1980). An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 940–952. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.940.
Donohue, S. K., Hunter, W. G. S., & Richards, L. G. (2012). Work in progress: Creativity, mindset, and implications for engineering design instruction. In Proceedings—Frontiers in education conference, FIE. CONF. University of Virginia, United States. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84874720402&partnerID=40&md5=95f510fd88e9569e68fd8f10917f5349. Accessed 5 July 2015.
Dupeyrat, C., & Mariné, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck’s model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.007.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational Processes Affecting Learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1040.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House Digital Inc.
Dweck, C. S. (2015). Growth. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(2), 242–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12072.
Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories: Elaboration and extension of the model. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0604_12.
Eisenbart, B., Gericke, K., & Blessing, L. (2011). A framework for comparing design modelling approaches across disciplines. In: International conference on engineering design (ICED) (pp. 1–12).
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Flores, D., Lemons, A., & Mcternan, H. (2011). The correlation between student growth mindset and conceptual development in physics. Arizona State University.
Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541–553. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.541.
Hamat, B., Badke-Schaub, P., & Eris, O. (2015). Design learning mind-sets. In C. Weber, S. Husung, G. Cascini, M. Cantamessa, D. Marjanovic, & M. Bordegoni (Eds.), International conference on engineering design, ICED15 (pp. 341–350). Milan. Retrieved from https://www.designsociety.org/publication/38020/design_learning_mind-sets. Accessed 30 May 2017.
Hamat, B., Badke-Schaub, P., & Schoormans, J. (2016). Individual dispositions and the adoption of surface learning in design. In Proceedings of international design conference, DESIGN, DS 84 (pp. 2081–2090).
Hamat, B., Eisenbart, B., Schoormans, J., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2017). Differences between the discerning and opportunistic mind-sets in design learning. In ICED17: 21st international conference on engineering design, 9(August) (pp. 235–244).
Householder, A. S. (1939). (Lewin, Kurt. Principles of topological psychology. Translated by Fritz and Grace Heider. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936. pp. 231). The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 54(1), 249–259. JOUR. http://doi.org/10.1080/08856559.1939.10533843.
Howard, T. J., Culley, S. J., & Dekoninck, E. (2008). Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Design Studies, 29(2), 160–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001.
Kokotovich, V. (2008). Problem analysis and thinking tools: An empirical study of non-hierarchical mind mapping. Design Studies, 29(1), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.09.001.
Kumar, R. (2011). Research methodology (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified. New York, NY: Architectural Press.
Lewin, K. (1958). Group decision and social change. Readings in social psychology (Vol. 3). New York: Holt, Rinehart Winston. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886306297004.
Liem, G. A. D., & Bernardo, A. B. (2010). Epistemological beliefs and theory of planned behavior: Examining beliefs about knowledge and knowing as distal predictors of indonesian tertiary students’ intention to study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher., 1, 2. https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v19i1.1513.
Mangels, J. A., Butterfield, B., Lamb, J., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Why do beliefs about intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsl013.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction theory, research and practice (pp. 87–101). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8.
McCombs, B. L. (1988). Motivational skills training: Combining metacognitive, cognitive, and affective learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 141–169). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (1994). Fundamentals of qualitative data analysis. In H. Salmon, K. Perry, K. Koscielak, & La. Barrett (Eds.), Qualitative data analysis (Chap. 4, 3rd edn.). New York: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Ravenscroft, S. P., Waymire, T. R., & West, T. D. (2012). Accounting students’ metacognition: The association of performance, calibration error, and mindset. Issues in Accounting Education, 27(3), 707–732. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace-50148.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 1–20.
Thomke, S. H., & Nimgade, A. (2000). IDEO product development. Retrieved from May 7, 2017 http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=27285.
Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2007). Product design and development (4th ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill Education.
Williamson, P. K. (2011). The creative problem solving skills of arts and science students—The two cultures debate revisited. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.001.
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722805.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hamat, B., Eisenbart, B., Badke-Schaub, P. et al. The influence of a designers’ mind-set on their design process and design outcomes. Int J Technol Des Educ 30, 737–753 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09522-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09522-8