An official website of the United States government
This paper presents empirical evidence on which to ground the understanding of effects of a design support on Product/Service Systems (PSS) designing. The effects are measured by the extent of application of a systems perspective and level of integration of product and service elements during PSS designing. Protocol analyses of a control team and an experiment team, involving experienced practitioners performing an identical PSS design task are conducted. Only the experiment team is provided with the design support. The Function–Behavior– Structure ontology and a scheme for the systems perspective are utilized to code the data. Results show preliminary insight into the influence of a design support. The focus on systems level abstraction shows a three-fold increase, the cognitive effort spent on behavior of structure is halved and the effort on design description is more than doubled, in the experiment team.
more »
« less
Analyzing cognitive processes of a product/service-system design session using protocol analysis
Abstract Product/service systems (PSSs) are increasingly found in markets, and more resources are being invested in PSS design. Despite the substantial research into PSS design, the current literature exhibits an incomplete understanding of it as a cognitive activity. This article demonstrates that the methods used to analyze product designers’ cognitive behavior can be used to produce comparable and commensurable results when analyzing PSS designers. It also generates empirical grounding for the development of hypotheses based on a cognitive study of a PSS design session in a laboratory environment using protocol analysis. This study is a part of a larger project comparing PSS design with product design. The results, which are based on the function–behavior–structure coding scheme, show that PSS design, when coded using this scheme, can be quantitatively compared with product design. Five hypotheses were developed based on the results of the study of this design session concerning where and how designers expend their cognitive design effort. These hypotheses can be used to design experiments that test them and provide the grounding for a fuller understanding of PSS design.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1762415
- PAR ID:
- 10253724
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing
- Volume:
- 34
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0890-0604
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 515 to 530
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This paper presents a study investigating the differences between what designers and design managers say about designing and what designers do. Five datasets are analysed, labelled Samsung, Philips, Design Centre Pharmaceutical, Design Seminar, (interview designers and managers when they talk about designing) and DTRS7 (design session about designers designing). Differences between describing designing and designing are identified using a combined method of protocol analysis, word frequency count and sentiment analysis. There is significantly more Function (F) and less Structure (S) issues mentioned during describing designing than when designing. Sentiment is more positive when describing designing than when designing. Results also show that protocol analysis methods and the FBS ontology based coding scheme can be applied to design management and descriptions of the design process as well as to designing.more » « less
-
Designers can benefit from inspirational stimuli when presented during the design process. Encountering external stimuli can also lead designers to negative design outcomes by limiting exploration of the design space and idea generation. Prior work has investigated how specific features of inspirational stimuli can be beneficial or harmful to designers. However, the processes designers use to search for and discover inspirational stimuli leading to these outcomes are less known. The objective of this work is thus to better understand how designers search for inspirational design stimuli. Specifically, we investigate how factors such as designer expertise and search modality (e.g., text vs. visual-based) impact both explicit and implicit features during the search for design stimuli. A cognitive study was completed by novice and expert designers (seven students and eight professionals), who searched for design stimuli using a novel multi-modal search platform while following a think-aloud protocol. The multi-modal search platform enabled search using text and nontext inputs, and provided design stimuli in the form of 3D-model parts. This work presents methods to describe search processes in terms of three levels: activities, behaviors, and pathways, as defined in this paper. Our findings determine that design expertise and search modality influence search behavior. Illustrative examples are presented and discussed of search processes leading designers to both negative and beneficial outcomes, such as designers fixating on specific results or benefiting unexpectedly from unintentional inspirational stimuli. Overall, this work contributes to an improved understanding of how designers search for inspiration, and key factors influencing these behaviors.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Heuristics are essential for addressing the complexities of engineering design processes. The goodness of heuristics is context-dependent. Appropriately tailored heuristics can enable designers to find good solutions efficiently, and inappropriate heuristics can result in cognitive biases and inferior design outcomes. While there have been several efforts at understanding which heuristics are used by designers, there is a lack of normative understanding about when different heuristics are suitable. Towards addressing this gap, this paper presents a reinforcement learning-based approach to evaluate the goodness of heuristics for three sub-problems commonly faced by designers while carrying out design under resource constraints: (i) learning the mapping between the design space and the performance space, (ii) sequential information acquisition in design, and (iii) decision to stop information acquisition. Using a multi-armed bandit formulation and simulation studies, we learn the heuristics that are suitable for these sub-problems under different resource constraints and problem complexities. The results of our simulation study indicate that the proposed reinforcement learning-based approach can be effective for determining the quality of heuristics for different sub-problems, and how the effectiveness of the heuristics changes as a function of the designer's preference (e.g., performance versus cost), the complexity of the problem, and the resources available.more » « less
-
Gesture recognition devices provide a new means for natural human-computer interaction. However, when selecting these devices to be used in games, designers might find it challenging to decide which gesture recognition device will work best. In the present research, we compare three vision-based, hand-gesture devices: Leap Motion, Microsoft’s Kinect, and Intel’s RealSense. The comparison provides game designers with an understanding of the main factors to consider when selecting these devices and how to design games that use them. We developed a simple hand-gesture-based game to evaluate performance, cognitive demand, comfort, and player experience of using these gesture devices. We found that participants preferred and performed much better using Leap Motion and Kinect compared to using RealSense. Leap Motion also outperformed or was equivalent to Kinect. These findings were supported by players’ accounts of their experiences using these gesture devices. Based on these findings, we discuss how such devices can be used by game designers and provide them with a set of design cautions that provide insights into the design of gesture-based games.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060420000402
