Search for: All records

Abstract Illusory correlation (IC) is a cognitive bias that appears when decisions are based on false perception of patterns from limited data and can prevent subjects from detecting present correlations. It appears in design or psychology studies as a secondary bias, but has not been studied in-depth in engineering design. This research examines the presence of IC during concept evaluation of the engineering design process and how current engineering design education may mitigate the appearance of IC. To examine IC, different products at four different sketch quality levels and render quality levels, from quick hand drawing to shaded product render, were presented to participants through a survey-based data collection instrument. The four sketch and/or render quality levels simulate the variety of presented drawings when a design engineer is evaluating colleagues’ concepts during group work. Participants, 70 undergraduate (novice) and 21 graduate (advanced) engineering students at a major southeast US institution, were asked to rank these products based on a series of function-based and preference-based attributes. The collected data were analyzed to see if sketch and/or render quality impacted participants’ ability to gage functionality of the presented products. Results indicated no statistically significant linear correlation between better rankings of products and the sketch and/or render quality level of the provided depictions for function-based questions; however, a non-linear relationship was present for preference-based questions where participants gave higher rankings to products drawn at intermediate quality levels. No statistically significant differences were found in the strength of correlations between rankings and sketch and/or render quality levels in the comparison of novice and advanced student designers, but advanced student designers’ perception of product functionality was more strongly correlated to pre-determined baseline answers based on user ratings of the selected products. This may indicate less vulnerability to IC bias with more design engineering education due to a stronger intuition for and understanding of product functionality based on visual inspection. 

Just as engineering designs can be uniquely created for different cultures around the world, engineers come from all over and view design through their own cultural lenses. Culture can impact how designers perceive themselves, their self-efficacy, and the way they interpret the design task at hand. Studies have shown that cultural values and behavior (i.e., cultural context) impact communication patterns, as well as learning strategies (Newman et al., 2017, “Psychological Safety: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev., 27(3), pp. 521–535. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001; Hirsch et al., 2001, “Engineering Design and Communication: The Case for Interdisciplinary Collaboration,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., 17(4/5), pp. 343–348). Halls' information processing continuum illuminates how some cultures communicate explicitly through written and spoken words (low context), while others communicate with a common awareness of nonverbal cues (high context) (Handford et al., 2019, “Which ‘Culture’? A Critical Analysis of Intercultural Communication in Engineering Education,” J. Eng. Educ., 108(2), pp. 161–177. 10.1002/jee.20254). Designers from low-context cultures are more comfortable in a low-context learning environment (e.g., with explicitly written instructions), whereas those from high-context cultures benefit more from face-to-face interactions (Goel and Pirolli, 1992, “The Structure of Design Problem Spaces,” Cogn. Sci., 16(3), pp. 395–429. 10.1207/s15516709cog1603_3). These communication differences impact cross-cultural collaboration within global companies and virtual teams. This study examined whether communicating a design task in a more engaging manner would impact solution quality and self-efficacy, particularly in light of the designer's culture and/or familiarity with the design problem. Engineering undergraduate students and professionals were recruited from each of 10 countries, including the United States, to complete a design task and respond to self-perception questions. Participants were presented with the design problem in one of two modes: written (low context) or video (high context). Results showed that delivery modality and cultural context did impact design solution quality and self-efficacy; however, differences were found between professionals and students. 

Throughout the mechanical design process, designers, the majority of whom are men, often fail to consider the needs of women, resulting in consequences ranging from inconvenience to increased risk of serious injury or death. Although these biases are well studied in other fields of research, the mechanical design field lacks formal investigation into this phenomenon. In this study, engineering students (n = 301) took a survey in which they read a Persona describing a student makerspace user and a Walkthrough describing the user’s interaction with the makerspace while completing a project. During the Walkthrough, the user encountered various obstacles or Pain Points. Participants were asked to recall and evaluate the Pain Points that the user encountered and then evaluated their perceptions of the makerspace and user. The independent variables under investigation were the gender of the user Persona (woman, gender-neutral, or man), the Walkthrough room case (crafting or woodworking makerspace), and the modality of the Persona and Walkthrough (text- or audio-based). Results showed that participants from the Text-based modality were better able to recall Pain Points compared to participants from the Audio-based modality. Pain Points were assessed as more severe when they impacted women users, potentially stemming from protective paternalism. In addition to finding that the gender of a user impacted the way a task environment was perceived, results confirmed the presence of androcentrism, or “default man” assumptions, in the way designers view end users of unknown gender. Promisingly, providing user Persona information in an audio modality significantly reduced this bias compared to text-based modalities, indicating that providing richer detail in user personas has the capability to reduce gender bias in designers. 

Throughout the mechanical design process, designers, the majority of whom are men, often fail to consider the needs of women, resulting in consequences ranging from inconvenience to increase risk of death or serious injury. Although these biases are well-studied in other fields of research, the mechanical design field lacks formal investigation into this phenomenon. In this study, undergraduate engineering students (n = 151) took a survey in which they read a Persona describing a student makerspace employee and a Walkthrough describing their interaction with the makerspace while completing a project. During the Walkthrough, the user encountered various obstacles, or Pain Points. Participants were asked to recall and evaluate the Pain Points that the user encountered, then evaluated their perceptions of the makerspace and user. Six different experimental conditions were used to investigate the impact of gender-stereotyped tasks and the gender of a user on designers’ interpretation of them and their needs. In addition to finding that the gender of a user impacted the way a task environment was perceived, results confirmed the presence of androcentrism, or “default man” assumptions, in the way designers view end users of unknown gender. Future work will explore methodologies of overcoming this bias so that designers are able to consider the diverse needs of a range of users. 

This article applies a qualitative ethnographic research approach to explore the perceptions of highly-skilled makers of gender and its role in their makerspace. It explores two research topics – common problems impacting makerspaces and the role of gender in makerspaces – and then analyses the results in the context of their impact on women’s sense of self-efficacy. Various factors relating to the overall makerspace culture contribute to women’s lowered sense of self-efficacy. In the makerspace under study in this work, a feminine-stereotyped Craft Area had been integrated among the more ‘traditional’ makerspace equipment, affecting women’s participation in the space. Ergonomic and accessibility problems in the masculine-stereotyped areas of the makerspace were more likely to negatively impact women’s use of the space. We discuss potential solutions to common problems in the makerspace and share recommendations to create a more universally accessible makerspace and impart the benefits of experiential learning more equitably. 

Abstract This research examines how cognitive bias manifests in the design activities of graduate student design teams, with a particular focus on how to uncover evidence of these biases through survey-based data collection. After identifying bias in design teams, this work discusses those biases with consideration for the intent of error management, through the lens of adaptive rationality. Data was collected in one graduate level design course across nine design teams over the course of a semester-long project. Results are shown for five different types of bias: bandwagon, availability, status quo, ownership, and hindsight biases. The conclusions drawn are based on trends and statistical correlations from survey data, as well as course deliverables. This work serves as a starting point for highlighting the most common forms of bias in design teams, with the goal of developing ways in which to mitigate those biases in future work. 

Abstract This study works toward addressing a knowledge gap in understanding how heuristics are developed, retrieved, employed, and modified by designers. Having a better awareness of one’s own set of heuristics can be beneficial for relaying to other team members, improving a team’s training processes, and aiding others on their path to design expertise. The ability to understand and justify the use of a heuristic should lead to more effective decision-making in systems design. To do this, the heuristics and their characteristics must be extracted using a repeatable scientific research methodology. This study describes a unique extraction and characterization process compared to prior literature. It includes some of the first work towards documenting heuristics for both designers and operators in a hybrid manufacturing setting. Eight participants performed a series of two design journals, two interviews, and one survey. Heuristics were extracted and refined between each method and then verified by participants in the survey. The surveys produced novel statistically significant findings in regard to heuristic characterizations, impacting how participants view how often a heuristic is used, the reliability of the heuristic, and the evolution of the heuristic. Lastly, an alternate perspective of heuristics as an error management bias is highlighted and discussed.