用文字构建设计活动:探索分析设计过程的语言学方法

IF 3.2 1区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING Design Studies Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.destud.2023.101182
Senthil Chandrasegaran, Almila Akdag Salah, Peter Lloyd
{"title":"用文字构建设计活动:探索分析设计过程的语言学方法","authors":"Senthil Chandrasegaran,&nbsp;Almila Akdag Salah,&nbsp;Peter Lloyd","doi":"10.1016/j.destud.2023.101182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Analysing transcripts of design activity typically involve either close reading or manual coding of data, which limits the amount of data that can be analysed. In contrast, we explore a machine-learning based linguistic analysis tool called Empath to identify patterns of reasoning in design talk. The data we use derives from the Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS) shared-data workshops which we analyse to look at two contrasting aspects of design talk: the expression of tentativeness, characterising designers' generative thinking; and the articulation of explanations, characterising their deductive or analytical thinking. We show, at the level of speech turns, how tentativeness and explanation relate to, and overlap, each other. Finally, we discuss the limitations of this ‘linguistic analysis at scale’ approach.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50593,"journal":{"name":"Design Studies","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 101182"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructing design activity in words: Exploring linguistic methods to analyse the design process\",\"authors\":\"Senthil Chandrasegaran,&nbsp;Almila Akdag Salah,&nbsp;Peter Lloyd\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.destud.2023.101182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Analysing transcripts of design activity typically involve either close reading or manual coding of data, which limits the amount of data that can be analysed. In contrast, we explore a machine-learning based linguistic analysis tool called Empath to identify patterns of reasoning in design talk. The data we use derives from the Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS) shared-data workshops which we analyse to look at two contrasting aspects of design talk: the expression of tentativeness, characterising designers' generative thinking; and the articulation of explanations, characterising their deductive or analytical thinking. We show, at the level of speech turns, how tentativeness and explanation relate to, and overlap, each other. Finally, we discuss the limitations of this ‘linguistic analysis at scale’ approach.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Design Studies\",\"volume\":\"86 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Design Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X23000236\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Studies","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X23000236","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

分析设计活动的抄本通常涉及对数据的仔细阅读或手动编码,这限制了可以分析的数据量。相比之下,我们探索了一种基于机器学习的语言分析工具,称为Empath,以识别设计谈话中的推理模式。我们使用的数据来自设计思维研究研讨会(DTRS)的共享数据研讨会,我们分析了设计谈话的两个不同方面:尝试性的表达,设计师的生成思维特征;以及解释的清晰性,体现了他们的演绎或分析思维。在言语转折的层面上,我们展示了试探性和解释性是如何相互关联和重叠的。最后,我们讨论了这种“大规模语言分析”方法的局限性。
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
Constructing design activity in words: Exploring linguistic methods to analyse the design process

Analysing transcripts of design activity typically involve either close reading or manual coding of data, which limits the amount of data that can be analysed. In contrast, we explore a machine-learning based linguistic analysis tool called Empath to identify patterns of reasoning in design talk. The data we use derives from the Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS) shared-data workshops which we analyse to look at two contrasting aspects of design talk: the expression of tentativeness, characterising designers' generative thinking; and the articulation of explanations, characterising their deductive or analytical thinking. We show, at the level of speech turns, how tentativeness and explanation relate to, and overlap, each other. Finally, we discuss the limitations of this ‘linguistic analysis at scale’ approach.

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
Design Studies
Design Studies 工程技术-工程:制造
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Design Studies is a leading international academic journal focused on developing understanding of design processes. It studies design activity across all domains of application, including engineering and product design, architectural and urban design, computer artefacts and systems design. It therefore provides an interdisciplinary forum for the analysis, development and discussion of fundamental aspects of design activity, from cognition and methodology to values and philosophy. Design Studies publishes work that is concerned with the process of designing, and is relevant to a broad audience of researchers, teachers and practitioners. We welcome original, scientific and scholarly research papers reporting studies concerned with the process of designing in all its many fields, or furthering the development and application of new knowledge relating to design process. Papers should be written to be intelligible and pertinent to a wide range of readership across different design domains. To be relevant for this journal, a paper has to offer something that gives new insight into or knowledge about the design process, or assists new development of the processes of designing.
期刊最新文献
Abduction, inculturation, and urban design thinking From an ethics of the eyes to ethics of the bodies: Rethinking ethics in design research through sensory practices Transforming mature design management to better firm performance: The importance of top management involvement Interior design ways of knowing: Embracing unpredictability That was fun, now what?: Modelizing knowledge dynamics to explain co-design's shortcomings
×
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