Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:27:13.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Overcoming design fixation: Design by analogy studies and nonintuitive findings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 April 2016

Diana P. Moreno ,
Luciënne T. Blessing ,
Maria C. Yang ,
Alberto A. Hernández  and
Kristin L. Wood
Diana P. Moreno*
Affiliation:
Research Unit in Engineering Science, Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Luciënne T. Blessing
Affiliation:
Research Unit in Engineering Science, Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Maria C. Yang
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
Alberto A. Hernández
Affiliation:
Engineering and Sciences School, Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, México City, México
Kristin L. Wood
Affiliation:
Engineering and Product Development Pillar, Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
*
Reprint requests to: Diana P. Moreno, Research Unit in Engineering Science, Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication, University of Luxembourg, 6 Rue Richard Coudenhouve Kalergi, Luxembourg. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Design fixation is a phenomenon with important significance to many fields of design due to the potential negative impacts it may have in design outcomes, especially during the ideation stage of the design process. The present study aims to provide a framework for understanding, or at least probing, design fixation by presenting a review of existing defixation approaches, as well as metrics that have been employed to understand and account for design fixation. This study also describes the results of two design by analogy (DbA) methods, WordTree and SCAMPER, to overcome design fixation in an experiment that involved 97 knowledge-domain experts. The study outcomes are at least twofold: a common framework of metrics and approaches to overcome design fixation in a wide range of design problems and nonintuitive results for DbA approaches in design fixation and other related creativity metrics. The application of WordTree and SCAMPER shows that both methods yield increased novelty compared to a control, where the SCAMPER results are significantly higher than WordTree. It is also found that WordTree mitigates design fixation whereas SCAMPER appears to be ineffective for this purpose but effective to generate an increased quantity of novel ideas. These results demonstrate that both DbA methods provide de-fixation capabilities and enhance designers’ creativity during idea generation.

Keywords

CreativityDesign by AnalogyDesign CognitionDesign FixationDesign Methods
Type
Special Issue Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 30 , Issue 2: Design Computing and Cognition (DCC'14) , May 2016 , pp. 185 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agogué, M., Kazakçi, A., Weil, B., & Cassotti, M. (2011). The impacts of examples on creative design: explaining fixation and stimulation effects. 18th Int. Conf. Engineering Design. Copenhagen: ICED.Google Scholar
Altshuller, G. (1999). The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, Systematic Innovation, and Technical Creativity. Worchester, MA: Technical Innovation Center.Google Scholar
Andersson, P. (1994). Early design phases and their role in designing for quality. Journal of Engeering Design 5(4), 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, L., Ormerod, T., & Morley, N. (2004). Spontaneous analogizing in engineering design: a comparative analysis of experts and novices. Design Studies 25(5), 495–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björklund, T. (2013). Initial mental representations of design problems: differences between experts and novices. Design Studies 34(2), 135–160.Google Scholar
Blosiu, J. (1999). Use of synectics as an idea seeding technique to enhance design creativity. Proc. IEEE SMC ‘99 Conf. 1999: IEEE Int. Conf. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 3, pp. 1001–1006. Tokyo: IEEE.Google Scholar
Bonnardel, N. (2000). Towards understanding and supporting creativity in design: analogies in a constrained cognitive environment. Knowledge-Based Systems 13(7), 505–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cagan, J., & Vogel, C. (2013). Creating Breakthrough Products, 2nd ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, A. (2013). Understanding influences on engineering creativity and innovation: a biographical study of 12 outstanding engineering designers and innovators. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation 1(1), 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, J., Fu, K., Schunn, C., Cagan, J., Wood, K., & Kotovsky, K. (2011 a). On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design: ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 133(8). doi:10.1115/1.4004396Google Scholar
Chan, J., Fu, K., Schunn, C., Cagan, J., Wood, K., & Kotovsky, K. (2011 b). On the effective use of design-by-analogy: influences of analogical distance and commonness of analogous design on ideation performance. 18th Int. Conf. Engineering Design. Copenhagen: ICED.Google Scholar
Choo, P., Lou, Z., Camburn, B.K., Wood, K., & Grey, F. (2014). Ideation methods: a first study on measured outcomes with personality type. ASME 2014 Int. Design Engineering Conf./ Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., IDETC/CIE 2014, Paper No. DETC2014-34953. Buffalo, NY: ASME.Google Scholar
Christensen, B., & Schunn, C. (2005). Spontaneous access and analogical incubation effects. Creativity Research Journal 17(1–2), 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B., & Schunn, C. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structures: the case of engineering design. Memory and Cognition 35(1), 29–38.Google Scholar
Christiaans, H., & Van Andel, J. (1993). The effects of examples on the use of knowledge in a student design activity: the case of the “flying Dutchman.” Design Studies 14(1), 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrysikou, E., & Weisberg, R. (2005). Following the wrong footsteps: fixation effects of pictorial examples in a design problem-solving task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 31(5), 1134–1148.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: an overview. Design Studies 25(5), 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, A., & Sarkar, S. (2011). Unfixing design fixation: from cause to computer simulation. Journal of Creative Behavior 45(2), 147–159.Google Scholar
Dugosh, K., & Paulus, P. (2005). Cognitive and social comparison processes in brainstorming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 41(3), 313–320.Google Scholar
Dugosh, K., Paulus, P., Roland, E., & Yang, H. (2000). Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79(5), 722–735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eberle, B. (1996). Scamper: Games for Imagination Development. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
Fu, K., Moreno, D., Yang, M., & Wood, K. (2014). Bio-inspired design: an overview investigating open questions from the broader field of design-by-analogy. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 136(11), 111102. doi:10.1115/1.4028289Google Scholar
Genco, N., Hölttä-Otto, K., & Seepersad, C. (2012). An experimental investigation of the innovation capabilities of undergraduate engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education 101(1), 60–81.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Markman, A. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist 52(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
German, T., & Barrett, H. (2005). Functional fixedness in a technologically sparse culture. Psychological Science 16(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
Girotra, K., Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. (2010). Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Science 56(4), 591–605.Google Scholar
Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of Thought. Cambridge, MA: Bradford–MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grantham, K., Okudan, G., Simpson, T. W., & Ashour, O. (2010). A study on situated cognition: product dissection's effect on redesign activities. Proc. Int. Design Engineering. Montreal: ASME.Google Scholar
Harris, B. (1973). Heuristics and design. Papers in Regional Science 31(1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Luna, A., & Cárdenas-Franco, L. (1988). Optimal design of glass molds using CAD/CAE and response surface methodology techniques. Computers & Graphics 12(3), 391–399.Google Scholar
Hey, J., Linsey, J., Agogino, A., & Wood, K. (2007). Analogies and metaphors in creative design. Proc. Mudd Design Workshop VI, Claremont, CA, May 23–25.Google Scholar
Heylighen, A., & Neuckermans, H. (2003). Learning from experience? Promises, problems and side-effects of case-based reasoning in architectural design. International Journal of Architectural Computing 1(1), 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansson, D., & Smith, S. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies 12(1), 3–11.Google Scholar
Jensen, D. (2010). Effects of an early prototyping experience: can design fixation be avoided? Proc. Annual Conf. Exposition. Louisville, KY: American Society for Engineering Education.Google Scholar
Kan, J., & Gero, J. (2008). Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designing. Design Studies 29(4), 315–337.Google Scholar
Keller, R., Eckert, C., & Clarkson, P. (2009). Using an engineering change methodology to support conceptual design. Journal of Engineering Design 20(6), 571–587.Google Scholar
Kershaw, T., Hölttä-Otto, K., & Lee, Y. (2011). The effect of prototyping and critical feedback on fixation in engineering design. Proc. 33rd Annual Conf. Cognitive Science Society, CogSci'11. Boston, July 20–23.Google Scholar
Kohn, N., & Smith, S. (2009). Partly vs. completely out of your mind: effects of incubation and distraction on resolving fixation. Journal of Creative Behavior 43(2), 102–118.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. (1997). Educational implications of analogy: a view from case-based reasoning. American Psychology 52(1), 57–66.Google Scholar
Leynes, P., Rass, O., & Landau, J. (2008). Eliminating the memory blocking effect. Memory 16(8), 852–872.Google Scholar
Linsey, J., Clauss, E., Kortoglu, T., Murphy, J., Wood, K., & Markman, A. (2011). An experimental study of group idea generation techniques: understanding the roles of idea representation and viewing methods. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 133(3), 031008–031015. doi:10.1115/1.4003498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linsey, J., Clauss, E., Wood, K., Laux, J., & Markman, A. (2007). Increasing innovation: a trilogy of experiments towards a design-by analogy method. Proc. ASME 2007 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf./Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., IDETC/CIE 2007. Las Vegas, NV: ASME.Google Scholar
Linsey, J., Markman, A., & Wood, K. (2008). WordTrees: a method for design-by-analogy. Proc. ASEE Annual Conf. Pittsburgh, PA: ASEE.Google Scholar
Linsey, J., Markman, A., & Wood, K. (2012). Design by analogy: a study of the WordTree method for problem re-representation. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 134(4), 041009.Google Scholar
Linsey, J., Tseng, I., Fu, K., Cagan, J., Wood, K., & Schunn, C. (2010). A study of design fixation, its mitigation and perception in engineering design faculty. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 132(4), 041003.Google Scholar
Linsey, J., Wood, K., & Markman, A. (2008). Increasing innovation: presentation and evaluation of the WordTree design-by-analogy method. Proc. ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conf., DETC2008. New York: ASME.Google Scholar
Little, A., Wood, K., & McAdams, D. (1997). Functional analysis: a fundamental empirical study for reverse engineering, benchmarking and redesign. Proc. Design Engineering Technical Conf. ’97. Sacramento, CA: ASME.Google Scholar
Luchins, A., & Luchins, E. (1959). Rigidity of Behaviour: A Variational Approach to the Effect of Einstellung. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Books.Google Scholar
Luchins, A., & Luchins, E. (1970). Wertheimer's Seminars Revisited: Problem Solving and Thinking, Vol. 1. Albany, NY: State University of New York at Albany Press.Google Scholar
MacCrimmon, K., & Wagner, C. (1994). Stimulating ideas through creativity software. Management Science 40(11), 1514–1532.Google Scholar
Markman, A., & Wood, K. (2009). Tools for Innovation, Vol. 5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, A., Wood, K., Linsey, J., Murphy, J., & Laux, J. (2009). Supporting innovation by promoting analogical reasoning. In Tools for Innovation (Markman, A.B., & Wood, K.L., Eds.), pp. 85–103. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McAdams, D., & Wood, K. (2002). A quantitative similarity metric for design by analogy. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 24(2), 173–182.Google Scholar
McKerlie, D., & MacLean, A. (1994). Reasoning with design rationale: practical experience with design space analysis. Design Studies 15(2), 214–226.Google Scholar
Moreno, D., Blessing, L., Wood, K., Vögele, C., & Hernandez, A. (2015). Creativity predictors: findings from design-by-analogy ideation methods’ learning and performance. Proc. Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., IDETC/DTM 2015. Boston: ASME.Google Scholar
Moreno, D., Yang, M., Blessing, L., & Wood, K. (2014). Analogies to succeed: application to a service design problem. Proc. NordDesign 2014. Espoo, Finland: Design Society.Google Scholar
Moreno, D., Yang, M., Hernandez, A., Linsey, J., & Wood, K. (2014). A step beyond to overcome design fixation: a design-by-analogy approach. Proc. Design Computing and Cognition DCC, ‘14, pp. 661–680. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Moreno, D.P., Hernandez, A.A., Yang, M.C., Otto, K.N., Hölttä-Otto, K., Linsey, J.S., & Linden, A. (2014). Fundamental studies in design-by-analogy: a focus on domain-knowledge experts and applications to transactional design problems. Design Studies 35(3), 232–272.Google Scholar
Moss, J., Cagan, J., & Kotovsky, K. (2007). Design ideas and impasses: the role of open goals. 16th Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED07). Paris: ICED.Google Scholar
Moss, J., Kotovsky, K., & Cagan, J. (2007). The influence of open goals on the acquisition of problem relevant information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33(5), 876–891.Google Scholar
Oman, S., Tumer, I., Wood, K., & Seepersad, C. (2013). A comparison of creativity and innovation metrics and sample validation through in-class design projects. Journal of Research in Engineering Design 24(1), 65–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, K., & Wood, K. (1998). Product evolution: a reverse engineering and redesign methodology. Research in Engineering Design 10(4), 226–243.Google Scholar
Perttula, M., & Sipilä, P. (2007). The idea exposure paradigm in design idea generation. Journal of Engineering Design 18(1), 93–102.Google Scholar
Purcell, A., & Gero, J. (1996). Design and other types of fixation. Design Studies 17(4), 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers, 2nd ed.Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rodgers, P., Green, G., & McGown, A. (2000). Using concept sketches to track design progress. Design Studies 21(5), 451–464.Google Scholar
Sarkar, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (2007). Development of a method for assessing design creativity. Proc. Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED07). Paris, August 28–31.Google Scholar
Segers, N., & De Vries, B. (2003). The idea space system: words as handles to a comprehensive data structure. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, pp. 31–40. Dordrecht: Digital Design Research and Practice.Google Scholar
Segers, N., De Vries, B., & Achten, H. (2005). Do word graphs stimulate design? Design Studies 26(6), 625–647.Google Scholar
Shah, J., Kulkarni, S., & Vargas-Hernandez, N. (2000). Evaluation of idea generation methods for conceptual design: effectiveness metrics and design of experiments. Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4), 377–384.Google Scholar
Shah, J., Smith, S., & Vargas-Hernandez, N. (2003). Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Design Studies 24, 111–134.Google Scholar
Shostack, G. (1982). How to design a service. European Journal of Marketing 16(1), 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. (1995 a). Creative cognition: demystifying creativity. In The Mind at Work in the Classroom: Literacy & Thinking (Hedley, C., Antonacci, P., & Rabinowitz, M., Eds.), pp. 31–46. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, S. (1995 b). Getting into and out of mental ruts: a theory of fixation, incubation, and insight. In The Nature of Insight (Sternberg, R., & Davidson, J.E., Eds.), pp. 229–250. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S., & Blankenship, S. (1989). Incubation effects. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 27(4), 311–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S., & Blankenship, S. (1991). Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving. American Journal of Psychology 104(1), 61–87.Google Scholar
Smith, S., & Linsey, J. (2011). A three-pronged approach for overcoming design fixation. Journal of Creative Behavior 45(2), 83–91.Google Scholar
Srivathsavai, R., Genco, N., Hölttä-Otto, K., & Seepersad, C. (2010). Study of existing metrics used in measurement of ideation effectiveness. Proc. ASME IDETC Design Theory and Methodology Conf. Montreal: ASME.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R., & Lubart, T. (1999). The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. In Handbook of Creativity (Sternberg, R., Ed.), pp. 3–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Toh, C., Miller, S., & Kremer, G. (2012). Increasing novelty through product dissection activities in engineering design. Proc. Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. (IDETC). Chicago: ASME.Google Scholar
Tseng, I., Moss, J., Cagan, J., & Kotovsky, K. (2008). Overcoming blocks in conceptual design: the effects of open goals and analogical similarity on idea generation. Proc. Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf./Computers and Information in Engineering. Brooklyn, NY: ASME.Google Scholar
Vargas-Hernandez, N., Shah, J., & Smith, S. (2010). Understanding design ideation mechanisms through multilevel aligned empirical studies. Design Studies 31(4), 382–410.Google Scholar
Vermeulen, P. (2001). Organizing Product Innovation in Financial Services. Nijmegen: Nijmegen University Press.Google Scholar
Verhaegen, P., D'hondt, J., Vandevenne, D., Dewulf, S., & Duflou, J. (2011). Identifying candidates for design-by-analogy. Computers in Industry 62(4), 446–459.Google Scholar
Viswanathan, V., & Linsey, J. (2011). Design fixation in physical modeling: an investigation on the role of sunk cost. Proc. Int. Conf. Design Theory and Methodology. Washington, DC, August 28–31.Google Scholar
Viswanathan, V., & Linsey, J. (2012). A study on the role of expertise in design fixation and its mitigation. Proc. ASME Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf./Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., IDETC/CIE. Chicago: ASME.Google Scholar
Von Eye, A., & Mun, E. (2005). Analyzing Rater Agreement: Manifest Variable Methods. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Weaver, J., Kuhr, R., Wang, D., Crawford, R., Wood, K., & Jensen, D. (2009). Increasing innovation in multi-function systems: evaluation and experimentation of two ideation methods for design. Int. Design Engineering Conf./Computers and Information in Engineering, IDETC/CIE. San Diego, CA: ASME.Google Scholar
Yan, W., Zanni-Merk, C., Rousselot, F., & Cavallucci, D. (2013). Ontology matching for facilitating inventive de-sign based on semantic similarity and case-based reasoning. International Journal of Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Engineering Systems 17(3), 243–256.Google Scholar
Yang, M. (2004). An examination of prototyping and design outcome. Proc. Design Engineering Technical Conf. (DETC), pp. 1–6. New York: ASME.Google Scholar
Yang, M. (2009). Observations on concept generation and sketching in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design 20(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yilmaz, S., Seifert, C., & Gonzalez, R. (2010). Cognitive heuristics in design: instructional strategies to increase creativity in idea generation. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24(3), 335–355.Google Scholar
Youmans, R. (2007). Reducing the Effects of Fixation in Creative Design. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest.Google Scholar
Youmans, R. (2010). The effects of physical prototyping and groupwork on the reduction of design fixation. Design Studies 32(2), 115–138.Google Scholar
Youmans, R., & Arciszewski, T. (2012). Design fixation: a cloak of many colors. Proc. Design Computing and Cognition, DCC'12, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX, June 6–12.Google Scholar
Zahner, D., Nickerson, J., Tversky, B., Corter, J., & Ma, J. (2010). A fix for fixation? Rerepresenting and abstracting as creative processes in the design of information systems. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24(2), 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar