THE INFOGRAPHIC MODEL OF DESIGN THINKING PROCESS

Pelin Koçkan Özyıldız, Pelin Yıldız

Abstract


Purpose

Creativity as an outcome of our thoughts and actions is a controversial concept that has been discussed by many disciplines in different ways. In the light of cognitive research on creativity, this study aims to deal with the components of the idea generation process specific to interior design education. Based on the study conducted in the interior design studio, this paper introduces the infographic model of design thinking. the main purpose of the model is to summarize how design students initiate the design process, create their own design ideas, and also how they lead design thinking for a spatial solution.

Design/Methodology/Approach

The cross-disciplinary research paper within the context of the psychological studies on creative cognition consists of a detailed analysis of the design process in the design studio. A case study was conducted in the second-year undergraduate interior design studio at Hacettepe University in order to observe the students’ experiences during one semester. In the wake of this qualitative research, the data obtained from 15 design students selected have been analyzed gradually and a design thinking model has been generated with the findings.

Findings

In addition to the interpretation of the creativity models from the literature, initial analyses showed that design thinking can be explained in three main stages as preparation, conceptualization, and spatialization that underlie the internal and external process of design thinking in the design studio. With subsequent analyses, these stages have been divided into different strategical layers according to students’ experiences. As a result, the infographic model of the design thinking process is structured based on the evaluations of these components and the design approaches identified.

Research Limitations/Implications

The data acquired from the case study undertaken by the author were compared so as to identify the similarities and diversities of these processes. More research on different stages of the design process can shed more light on design thinking. In addition to this, qualitative data are based on a small group of students to get detailed information about the process. The proposed model can be adapted for different studies in the context of the design studio with more participants.

Practical/Social Implications

The proposed model in the research is intended to be used as a content map that shows the alternative ways of thinking in design ideation, and also an analysis method of the design process for future studies. In other words, the paper shows the two-way implications of the design thinking model on design education. One of which is a guide for practical use for design students and the other is an analytical tool for studio instructors or researchers.

Originality/Value

This study brings to focus on conceptualization and spatialization for creative idea generation in design studio education. On the basis of drawn from creativity models, the paper introduces a new process model that provides an original interpretation of existing models in design. The proposed model differs from previous cognitive studies, as it expands the ideation process with both internal and external operations.


Keywords


Creativity, creativity models, design thinking process, design education, interior design studio.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akın, Ö. (1978). “How Do Architects Design?”, pp. 65-98 in Artificial Intelligence and Pattern recognition CAD, edited by G. Latombe, New York: North Holland.

Andreasen, N. (2011). Yaratıcı Beyin Dehanın Nörobilimi, trans. by K. Güney, Ankara:Arkadaş Yayınevi.

Benami, O. (2002). Cognitive approach to creative conceptual design (Ph.D Thesis). Los Angeles: University of Southern California.

Cross, N. (2001). “Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity”, pp.79–103 in Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education, edited by C. Eastman, W. Newstatter, and M. McCracken. Oxford, UK: Elsevier,

Demirbaş, Ö. O. (2001). The relation of learning styles and performance scores of the students in interior architecture education (Ph.D Thesis). Ankara: Bilkent Üniversitesi.

Demirbaş, Ö. O., Demirkan H. (2003). “Focus on architectural design process through learning styles”, Design Studies, 24: 437-356

Fakhra, A. J. (2012). Conceptual Model of Design Creativity: Fostering Creative Cognition in Architecture and Design Pedagogy (Ph.D Thesis). Chicago: Institute of Design.

Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research,and applications. Cambridge: MIT Press.

French, M. J. (1985). Conceptual design for engineers. London, UK: The Design Council/Springer.

Getzels, J. W., Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. New York: Wiley.

Goldschmidt, G. (1994). “On visual design thinking: the vis kids of architecture”, Design Studies, 15(2): 158-174.

Guilford, J. P. (1968). Intelligence, creativity, and their educational implications. San Diego: RR Knapp.

Kahvecioğlu, N. P. (2001). Mimari Tasarım Eğitiminde Bilgi ve Yaratıcılık Etkileşimi (Ph.D Thesis). İstanbul: ITU.

Kwan, T., Yunyan, J. (2005). “Students’ learning styles and their correlation with performance in architectural design studio”, Design Studies, 26(1) : 19-34.

Lawson, B. (2005). How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified, Oxford: Architectural Press.

Lowenfeld, V.(1947). Creative and Mental Growth, New York: Macmillan.

Martinsen L. Ø., Kaufman G., and Furnham A. (2011). “Cognitive Style and Creativity”, pp.214-221 in Encyclopedia of Creativity, edited by M. A. Runco and S. R. Pritzker. Academic Press.

Mednick, S. A. (1962). “The Associative Basis of the Creative Process”, Psychologyical Review, 63(3): 220-232.

Mumford, M. D. (2003). “Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research”, Creativity Research Journal, 15: 107-120.

Newell, A., Herbert A.S. (1972). Human problem solving. NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ochsner, J. K. (2000). “Behind the Mask: A Psychoanalytic Perspective on Interaction in the Design Studio”, Journal of Architectural Education, 53(4): 194-206.

Oxman, R. (1997). “Design by re-representation: a model of visual reasoning in design”, Design Studies, 18: 329-347.

Oxman, R. (2004). “Think-maps: teaching design thinking in design education”, Design Studies, 25(1): 63-91.

Rhodes, M. (1961). “An analysis of creativity”, Phi Delta Kappan, 42: 305–310.

Roberts, A. (2006), “Cognitive Styles and Sudent Progression in Architectural Design Education”, Design Studies, 27: 168-181.

Rouquette, M. L. (1992). Yaratıcılık, trans. by Işın Gürbüz, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.

Runco, M. A. (2007). “Cognition and Creativity”, pp.1-38 in Creativity: Theories and Themes: Research, Development, and Practice, edited by M. A. Runco, Elsevier.

Runco, M. A., Chand, I. (1995). “Cognition and creativity”, Educational Psychology Review, 7: 243–267.

Salama, A. M. A.; Wilkinson, N. (2007). Design studio pedagogy: Horizons for the future. Gateshead, U.K.: Urban International Press.

Schön, D. A. (1985). The Design Studio, London, UK: RIBA Publication LTD.

Smith, S. M., Thomas B. W., and Ronald A. F. (1995). The creative cognition approach. MIT Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1972). “Predictive validity of the Torrance tests of creative thinking”, The Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(4): 236-262.

Türkyılmaz, Ç. C.; Polatoğlu Ç. (2012). “Erken Tasarım Evresinde Bilginin Dönüşümü Üzerine Bir Model Önerisi; Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Mimari Tasarım 3 Stüdyosunda Bir Deneme”, Megaron, 7(2): 103-115.

Uluoğlu, B. (1988). “Tasarım Stüdyosuna Bir Bakış”, Planlama, 88(2) : 21-25.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. London: Jonathan Cape.

Ward T. B. (2007). “Creative cognition as a window on creativity”, Methods, 42: 28-37.

Weisberg, R. (1986). Creativity: Genius and other myths, A series of books in psychology. US: W H Freeman / Times Books / Henry Holt & Co.

Zeisel, J. (2006). Inquiry by design: environment/ behavior/ neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape, and planning (Rev. ed.). New York: W.W. Norton & Company.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.114
Fatal error: Call to undefined function curl_init() in /var/www/html/iconarp/lib/pkp/classes/webservice/WebService.inc.php on line 198