学生对参与设计过程的建议的比较分析

K. Dugan, Shanna Daly
{"title":"学生对参与设计过程的建议的比较分析","authors":"K. Dugan, Shanna Daly","doi":"10.1115/1.4064671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Engineering designers are tasked with increasingly complex problems necessitating the use and development of various supports for navigating complexity. Prescriptive design process models are one such tool. However, little research has explored how engineering designers perceive these models' recommendations for engagement in design work. In this initial exploratory study, we analyzed data from 18 individual semi-structured interviews with mechanical engineering students to identify participant perceptions. As many design process model visualizations lack explicit attention to some social and contextual dimensions, we sought to compare perceptions among two drawn from engineering texts and one that was developed with the intent to emphasize social dimensions. We identified five salient areas of participant perceptions of the design process models. Perceptions of the process models related to what designers should do (starting and moving through a design process, gathering information, prototyping, and evaluating or testing) and what they should consider (aspects of focus). Our collection of participant perceptions across the three process models suggests different design process models make perceptions of certain recommendations more salient than others. However, participant perceptions also varied for the same process model. We suggest several implications for design education and training based on participant perceptions of these three process models, particularly the importance of leveraging multiple design process models. The comprehensive descriptions of participant perceptions across five areas of design work provided through our initial study provide a foundation for further investigations bridging designers' perceptions to intent to behavior and, ultimately, design outcomes.","PeriodicalId":506672,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mechanical Design","volume":"70 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Student Perceptions of Recommendations for Engagement in Design Processes\",\"authors\":\"K. Dugan, Shanna Daly\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/1.4064671\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Engineering designers are tasked with increasingly complex problems necessitating the use and development of various supports for navigating complexity. Prescriptive design process models are one such tool. However, little research has explored how engineering designers perceive these models' recommendations for engagement in design work. In this initial exploratory study, we analyzed data from 18 individual semi-structured interviews with mechanical engineering students to identify participant perceptions. As many design process model visualizations lack explicit attention to some social and contextual dimensions, we sought to compare perceptions among two drawn from engineering texts and one that was developed with the intent to emphasize social dimensions. We identified five salient areas of participant perceptions of the design process models. Perceptions of the process models related to what designers should do (starting and moving through a design process, gathering information, prototyping, and evaluating or testing) and what they should consider (aspects of focus). Our collection of participant perceptions across the three process models suggests different design process models make perceptions of certain recommendations more salient than others. However, participant perceptions also varied for the same process model. We suggest several implications for design education and training based on participant perceptions of these three process models, particularly the importance of leveraging multiple design process models. The comprehensive descriptions of participant perceptions across five areas of design work provided through our initial study provide a foundation for further investigations bridging designers' perceptions to intent to behavior and, ultimately, design outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mechanical Design\",\"volume\":\"70 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-06\",\"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/10.1115/1.4064671\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mechanical Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4064671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

工程设计人员的任务是解决日益复杂的问题,因此有必要使用和开发各种辅助工具,以驾驭复杂性。规范性设计流程模型就是这样一种工具。然而,很少有研究探讨工程设计师如何看待这些模型对参与设计工作的建议。在这项初步探索性研究中,我们分析了来自机械工程专业学生的 18 个半结构式访谈数据,以确定参与者的看法。由于许多设计过程模型可视化并没有明确关注某些社会和背景维度,我们试图比较两种从工程文本中提取的模型和一种以强调社会维度为目的而开发的模型之间的感知。我们确定了参与者对设计过程模型认知的五个突出领域。对流程模型的看法涉及设计者应该做什么(设计流程的开始和推进、收集信息、原型设计、评估或测试)以及他们应该考虑什么(关注的方面)。我们收集了参与者对三种流程模式的看法,结果表明,不同的设计流程模式会使参与者对某些建议的看法比对其他建议的看法更为突出。然而,对于相同的流程模式,参与者的看法也各不相同。根据参与者对这三种流程模式的看法,我们对设计教育和培训提出了一些启示,尤其是利用多种设计流程模式的重要性。我们的初步研究全面描述了参与者对设计工作五个领域的看法,这为进一步的研究奠定了基础,可以将设计师的看法与设计意图、设计行为以及最终的设计成果联系起来。
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
A Comparative Analysis of Student Perceptions of Recommendations for Engagement in Design Processes
Engineering designers are tasked with increasingly complex problems necessitating the use and development of various supports for navigating complexity. Prescriptive design process models are one such tool. However, little research has explored how engineering designers perceive these models' recommendations for engagement in design work. In this initial exploratory study, we analyzed data from 18 individual semi-structured interviews with mechanical engineering students to identify participant perceptions. As many design process model visualizations lack explicit attention to some social and contextual dimensions, we sought to compare perceptions among two drawn from engineering texts and one that was developed with the intent to emphasize social dimensions. We identified five salient areas of participant perceptions of the design process models. Perceptions of the process models related to what designers should do (starting and moving through a design process, gathering information, prototyping, and evaluating or testing) and what they should consider (aspects of focus). Our collection of participant perceptions across the three process models suggests different design process models make perceptions of certain recommendations more salient than others. However, participant perceptions also varied for the same process model. We suggest several implications for design education and training based on participant perceptions of these three process models, particularly the importance of leveraging multiple design process models. The comprehensive descriptions of participant perceptions across five areas of design work provided through our initial study provide a foundation for further investigations bridging designers' perceptions to intent to behavior and, ultimately, design outcomes.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Optimal design of assembling robot considering different limb topologies and layouts Design and Optimization of a Cable-driven Parallel Polishing Robot with Kinematic Error Modeling Fourier-Based Function Generation of Four-Bar Linkages with an Improved Sampling Points Adjustment and Sylvester's Dialytic Elimination Method Trust, Workload and Performance in Human-AI Partnering: The Role of AI Attributes in Solving Classification Problems A Cost-Aware Multi-Agent System for Black-Box Design Space Exploration
×
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