Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-h6jzd Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-02-16T22:46:53.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GENDER IDENTITY AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SHARED UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN DESIGNERS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Erin Johnson ,
Sandeep Krishnakumar ,
Cynthia Letting ,
Nicolas Soria-Zurita  and
Jessica Menold
Erin Johnson*
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Sandeep Krishnakumar
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Cynthia Letting
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Nicolas Soria-Zurita
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Jessica Menold
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
*
Johnson, Erin, Pennsylvania State University, United States of America, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Prior work has demonstrated that gender identity affects team psychological safety, which is critical to the development of a shared understanding of the task. Further, we know that a shared understanding can increase team cohesion and team performance. Little work has investigated how gender differences affect communicative acts within the context of design, and more specifically how gender differences may affect the development of a shared understanding of the design concept between designers. As a first step towards filling this gap, the current work presents findings from a controlled study conducted at The Pennsylvania State University with 22 design dyads (44 designers). The findings from this study indicate that gender identity within design dyads does not affect participants’ shared understanding of a design concept.

Keywords

Human behaviour in designTeamworkDesign engineering
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 1825 - 1834
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

andAmeri, F., Summers, J.D., Mocko, G.M. and Porter, M. (2008), “Engineering design complexity: an investigation of methods and measures”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 161–179, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0053-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babaria, P., Abedin, S., Berg, D. and Nunez-Smith, M. (2012), “‘I'm too used to it’: A longitudinal qualitative study of third year female medical students’ experiences of gendered encounters in medical education”, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 74 No. 7, pp. 1013–1020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beddoes, K. and Panther, G. (2018), “Gender and teamwork: an analysis of professors’ perspectives and practices”, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 330–343, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1367759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdahl, J.L. (1996), “Gender and leadership in work groups: Six alternative models”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, S., Stegmann, S., Hernandez Bark, A.S., Junker, N.M. and van Dick, R. (2017), “Think manager-think male, think follower-think female: Gender bias in implicit followership theories: BRAUN et al.”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 47 No. 7, pp. 377–388, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnes, M., Bartels, C.M., Kaatz, A. and Kolehmainen, C. (2015), “Why is John More Likely to Become Department Chair Than Jennifer?”, Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, Vol. 126, pp. 197–214.Google Scholar
Cejka, M.A. and Eagly, A.H. (1999), “Gender-Stereotypic Images of Occupations Correspond to the Sex Segregation of Employment”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 413–423, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167299025004002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, C., Jablokow, K., Mohammed, S. and Miller, S. (2022), “The Impact of Gender on Individual Perceptions and Team Psychological Safety in Engineering Design Teams”, IDETC-CIE 2022, Volume 6: 34th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology (DTM), https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2022-89910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, T.H. and Blake, S. (1991), “Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmondson, A. (1999), “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams”, Administrative Science Quarterly, [Sage Publications, Inc., Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University], Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 350–383, https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2666999.Google Scholar
Fu, K., Cagan, J. and Kotovsky, K. (2010), “Design Team Convergence: The Influence of Example Solution Quality”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 132 No. 11, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4002202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gyory, J.T., Cagan, J. and Kotovsky, K. (2019), “Are you better off alone? Mitigating the underperformance of engineering teams during conceptual design through adaptive process management”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 85–102, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-00303-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirshfield, L. and Koretsky, M.D. (2017), “Gender and Participation in an Engineering Problem-Based Learning Environment”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, Vol. 12 No. 1, https://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoegl, M. and Parboteeah, K.P. (2007), “Creativity in innovative projects: How teamwork matters”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 24 No. 1–2, pp. 148–166, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2007.01.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ioffe, S. (2010), “Improved Consistent Sampling, Weighted Minhash and L 1 Sketching”, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, presented at the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 246–255, https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2010.80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B.D. (2013), “Engineering Uncertainty: The role of uncertainty in the design of complex technological and business systems”, Futures, Vol. 50, pp. 56–65, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.03.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinsmann, M., Valkenburg, R. and Buijs, J. (2007), “Why do(n't) actors in collaborative design understand each other? An empirical study towards a better understanding of collaborative design”, CoDesign, Taylor & Francis, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 59–73, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710880601170875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konrad, A. (1992), “Diversity In Work Group Sex Composition: Implications for Majority and Minority Members”, Research in the Sociology of Organizations.Google Scholar
Miller, S., Marhefka, J., Heininger, K., Jablokow, K., Mohammed, S. and Ritter, S. (2019), “The trajectory of psychological safety in engineering teams: A longitudinal exploration in engineering design education”, International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Vol. 59278, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p. V007T06A026.Google Scholar
Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J. and Handelsman, J. (2012), “Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 109 No. 41, pp. 16474–16479, https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nandy, A., Dong, A. and Goucher-Lambert, K. (2021), “Evaluating Quantitative Measures for Assessing Functional Similarity in Engineering Design”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 144 No. 3, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4052302.Google Scholar
Oswald, M.E. and Grosjean, S. (2004), “Confirmation bias”, Cognitive Illusions: A Handbook on Fallacies and Biases in Thinking, Judgement and Memory, Vol. 79.Google Scholar
Page, A. (2005), “Batson's blind-spot: Unconscious stereotyping and the peremptory challenge”, BUL Rev., Vol. 85, p. 155.Google Scholar
Pelled, L.H. (1996), “Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening Process Theory”, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 615–631, https://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.6.615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelled, L.H., Eisenhardt, K.M. and Xin, K.R. (1999), “Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict, and Performance”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 1, p. 1, https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2667029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, K.H., Harrison, D.A. and Gavin, J.H. (2006), “Withholding inputs in team contexts: Member composition, interaction processes, evaluation structure, and social loafing.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 6, pp. 1375–1384, https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Régner, I., Thinus-Blanc, C., Netter, A., Schmader, T. and Huguet, P. (2019), “Committees with implicit biases promote fewer women when they do not believe gender bias exists”, Nature Human Behaviour, Vol. 3 No. 11, pp. 1171–1179, https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0686-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuben, E., Sapienza, P. and Zingales, L. (2014), “How stereotypes impair women's careers in science”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 111 No. 12, pp. 4403–4408, https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1314788111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salas, E., Sims, D.E. and Burke, C.S. (2005), “Is there a ‘Big Five’ in Teamwork?”, Small Group Research, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 555–599, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496405277134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrage, M. (2010), “The Culture(s) of PROTOTYPING”, Design Management Journal (Former Series), Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 55–65, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1948-7169.1993.tb00128.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Settles, I.H., O'Connor, R.C. and Yap, S.C.Y. (2016), “Climate Perceptions and Identity Interference Among Undergraduate Women in STEM: The Protective Role of Gender Identity”, Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 488–503, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0361684316655806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H.A. (1973), “The structure of ill structured problems”, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 4 No. 3–4, pp. 181–201, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(73)90011-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H.A. (1996), The Sciences of the Artificial, 3. ed., [Nachdr.]., MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Stone, R.B. and Wood, K.L. (1999), “Development of a Functional Basis for Design”, DETC 99, Volume 3: 11th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, pp. 261–275, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC99/DTM-8765.Google Scholar
Toh, C.A., Strohmetz, A.A. and Miller, S.R. (2016), “The Effects of Gender and Idea Goodness on Ownership Bias in Engineering Design Education”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 138 No. 10, p. 101105, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4034107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar