识别工程产品的社会影响的55个提示问题

IF 2.9 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Journal of Mechanical Design Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI:10.1115/1.4063453
Christopher Mattson, Thomas Geilman, Joshua Cook-Wright, Christopher Mabey, Eric Dahlin, John Salmon
{"title":"识别工程产品的社会影响的55个提示问题","authors":"Christopher Mattson, Thomas Geilman, Joshua Cook-Wright, Christopher Mabey, Eric Dahlin, John Salmon","doi":"10.1115/1.4063453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article introduces 55 prompt questions that can be used by design teams to consider the social impacts of the engineered products they develop. These 55 questions were developed by a team of engineers and social scientists to help design teams consider the wide range of social impacts that can result from their design decisions. After their development, these 55 questions were tested in a controlled experiment involving 12 design teams. Given a 1-h period of time, 6 control teams were asked to identify many social impacts within each of the 11 social impact categories identified by Rainock et al. (2018, The Social Impacts of Products: A Review, Impact Assess. Project Appraisal, 36, pp. 230241), while 6 treatment groups were asked to do the same while using the 55 questions as prompts to the ideation session. Considering all 1079 social impacts identified by the teams combined and using 99% confidence intervals, the analysis of the data shows that the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify high-quality, high-variety, high-novelty impacts across all 11 social impact categories during an ideation session, as opposed to focusing too heavily on a subset of impact categories. The questions (treatment) do this without reducing the quantity, quality, or novelty of impacts identified, compared to the control group. In addition, using a 90% confidence interval, the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify impacts when low quality, low variety, and low novelty are not filtered out. As a point of interest, the case where low quality and low variety impacts are removed – but low novelty impacts are not – the treatment draws the same conclusion but with only 85% confidence.","PeriodicalId":50137,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mechanical Design","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fifty-Five Prompt Questions for Identifying Social Impacts of Engineered Products\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Mattson, Thomas Geilman, Joshua Cook-Wright, Christopher Mabey, Eric Dahlin, John Salmon\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/1.4063453\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article introduces 55 prompt questions that can be used by design teams to consider the social impacts of the engineered products they develop. These 55 questions were developed by a team of engineers and social scientists to help design teams consider the wide range of social impacts that can result from their design decisions. After their development, these 55 questions were tested in a controlled experiment involving 12 design teams. Given a 1-h period of time, 6 control teams were asked to identify many social impacts within each of the 11 social impact categories identified by Rainock et al. (2018, The Social Impacts of Products: A Review, Impact Assess. Project Appraisal, 36, pp. 230241), while 6 treatment groups were asked to do the same while using the 55 questions as prompts to the ideation session. Considering all 1079 social impacts identified by the teams combined and using 99% confidence intervals, the analysis of the data shows that the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify high-quality, high-variety, high-novelty impacts across all 11 social impact categories during an ideation session, as opposed to focusing too heavily on a subset of impact categories. The questions (treatment) do this without reducing the quantity, quality, or novelty of impacts identified, compared to the control group. In addition, using a 90% confidence interval, the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify impacts when low quality, low variety, and low novelty are not filtered out. As a point of interest, the case where low quality and low variety impacts are removed – but low novelty impacts are not – the treatment draws the same conclusion but with only 85% confidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mechanical Design\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mechanical Design\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4063453\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mechanical Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4063453","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了55个提示问题,设计团队可以使用这些问题来考虑他们开发的工程产品的社会影响。这55个问题是由一个工程师和社会科学家团队开发的,以帮助设计团队考虑他们的设计决策可能产生的广泛的社会影响。在设计完成后,这55个问题在12个设计团队的对照实验中进行了测试。给定1小时的时间,6个对照组被要求确定Rainock等人确定的11个社会影响类别中的每个类别中的许多社会影响。(2018,产品的社会影响:回顾,影响评估。)项目评估,36,pp. 230241),而6个实验组被要求做同样的事情,同时使用55个问题作为构思环节的提示。考虑到团队确定的所有1079个社会影响,并使用99%的置信区间,对数据的分析表明,55个问题使团队在构思会议期间更均匀地确定所有11个社会影响类别中的高质量,高多样性,高新颖性影响,而不是过于关注影响类别的子集。与对照组相比,问题(治疗)做到了这一点,而没有减少所确定影响的数量、质量或新颖性。此外,使用90%的置信区间,55个问题使团队在低质量、低多样性和低新颖性没有被过滤掉的情况下更均匀地识别影响。作为一个有趣的点,在低质量和低品种影响被移除的情况下——但低新颖性影响没有被移除——处理方法得出了相同的结论,但只有85%的置信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fifty-Five Prompt Questions for Identifying Social Impacts of Engineered Products
Abstract This article introduces 55 prompt questions that can be used by design teams to consider the social impacts of the engineered products they develop. These 55 questions were developed by a team of engineers and social scientists to help design teams consider the wide range of social impacts that can result from their design decisions. After their development, these 55 questions were tested in a controlled experiment involving 12 design teams. Given a 1-h period of time, 6 control teams were asked to identify many social impacts within each of the 11 social impact categories identified by Rainock et al. (2018, The Social Impacts of Products: A Review, Impact Assess. Project Appraisal, 36, pp. 230241), while 6 treatment groups were asked to do the same while using the 55 questions as prompts to the ideation session. Considering all 1079 social impacts identified by the teams combined and using 99% confidence intervals, the analysis of the data shows that the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify high-quality, high-variety, high-novelty impacts across all 11 social impact categories during an ideation session, as opposed to focusing too heavily on a subset of impact categories. The questions (treatment) do this without reducing the quantity, quality, or novelty of impacts identified, compared to the control group. In addition, using a 90% confidence interval, the 55 questions cause teams to more evenly identify impacts when low quality, low variety, and low novelty are not filtered out. As a point of interest, the case where low quality and low variety impacts are removed – but low novelty impacts are not – the treatment draws the same conclusion but with only 85% confidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Mechanical Design
Journal of Mechanical Design 工程技术-工程:机械
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
139
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mechanical Design (JMD) serves the broad design community as the venue for scholarly, archival research in all aspects of the design activity with emphasis on design synthesis. JMD has traditionally served the ASME Design Engineering Division and its technical committees, but it welcomes contributions from all areas of design with emphasis on synthesis. JMD communicates original contributions, primarily in the form of research articles of considerable depth, but also technical briefs, design innovation papers, book reviews, and editorials. Scope: The Journal of Mechanical Design (JMD) serves the broad design community as the venue for scholarly, archival research in all aspects of the design activity with emphasis on design synthesis. JMD has traditionally served the ASME Design Engineering Division and its technical committees, but it welcomes contributions from all areas of design with emphasis on synthesis. JMD communicates original contributions, primarily in the form of research articles of considerable depth, but also technical briefs, design innovation papers, book reviews, and editorials.
期刊最新文献
Joint Special Issue on Advances in Design and Manufacturing for Sustainability Optimization of Tooth Profile Modification Amount and Manufacturing Tolerance Allocation for RV Reducer under Reliability Constraint Critical thinking assessment in engineering education: A Scopus-based literature review Accounting for Machine Learning Prediction Errors in Design Thinking Beyond the Default User: The Impact of Gender, Stereotypes, and Modality on Interpretation of User Needs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1