一年级和大四的工科学生在产生有或没有可持续性额外维度的设计方案时的认知差异

IF 1.8 Q3 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING Design Science Pub Date : 2021-02-08 DOI:10.1017/dsj.2021.3
Mo Hu, Tripp Shealy, J. Milovanovic
{"title":"一年级和大四的工科学生在产生有或没有可持续性额外维度的设计方案时的认知差异","authors":"Mo Hu, Tripp Shealy, J. Milovanovic","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2021.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The research presented in this paper explores how engineering students cognitively manage concept generation and measures the effects of additional dimensions of sustainability on design cognition. Twelve first-year and eight senior engineering students generated solutions to 10 design problems. Half of the problems included additional dimensions of sustainability. The number of unique design solutions students developed and their neurocognitive activation were measured. Without additional requirements for sustainability, first-year students generated significantly more solutions than senior engineering students. First-year students recruited higher cortical activation in the brain region generally associated with cognitive flexibility, and divergent and convergent thinking. Senior engineering students recruited higher activation in the brain region generally associated with uncertainty processing and self-reflection. When additional dimensions of sustainability were present, first-year students produced fewer solutions. Senior engineering students generated a similar number of solutions. Senior engineering students required less cortical activation to generate a similar number of solutions. The varying patterns of cortical activation and different number of solutions between first-year and senior engineering students begin to highlight cognitive differences in how students manage and retrieve information in their brain during design. Students’ ability to manage complex requirements like sustainability may improve with education.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/dsj.2021.3","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive differences among first-year and senior engineering students when generating design solutions with and without additional dimensions of sustainability\",\"authors\":\"Mo Hu, Tripp Shealy, J. Milovanovic\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/dsj.2021.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The research presented in this paper explores how engineering students cognitively manage concept generation and measures the effects of additional dimensions of sustainability on design cognition. Twelve first-year and eight senior engineering students generated solutions to 10 design problems. Half of the problems included additional dimensions of sustainability. The number of unique design solutions students developed and their neurocognitive activation were measured. Without additional requirements for sustainability, first-year students generated significantly more solutions than senior engineering students. First-year students recruited higher cortical activation in the brain region generally associated with cognitive flexibility, and divergent and convergent thinking. Senior engineering students recruited higher activation in the brain region generally associated with uncertainty processing and self-reflection. When additional dimensions of sustainability were present, first-year students produced fewer solutions. Senior engineering students generated a similar number of solutions. Senior engineering students required less cortical activation to generate a similar number of solutions. The varying patterns of cortical activation and different number of solutions between first-year and senior engineering students begin to highlight cognitive differences in how students manage and retrieve information in their brain during design. Students’ ability to manage complex requirements like sustainability may improve with education.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Design Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/dsj.2021.3\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Design Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

摘要本研究探讨了工科学生如何在认知上管理概念的产生,并测量了可持续性的附加维度对设计认知的影响。12名一年级学生和8名大四学生为10个设计问题提供了解决方案。一半的问题包括可持续性的额外方面。研究人员测量了学生提出的独特设计方案的数量以及他们的神经认知激活情况。在没有额外的可持续性要求的情况下,一年级的学生比大四的工程专业学生产生了更多的解决方案。一年级学生在通常与认知灵活性、发散性和趋同性思维相关的大脑区域获得了更高的皮层激活。高年级的工科学生在大脑中与不确定性处理和自我反思相关的区域中激活程度更高。当存在额外的可持续性维度时,一年级学生提出的解决方案较少。高级工程专业的学生也给出了类似数量的解决方案。高级工程专业的学生需要较少的皮质激活来产生相同数量的解决方案。一年级和大四工程专业学生大脑皮层激活模式的不同和解决方案数量的不同,开始凸显出学生在设计过程中如何在大脑中管理和检索信息的认知差异。学生管理复杂需求的能力,如可持续性,可能会随着教育的提高而提高。
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
Cognitive differences among first-year and senior engineering students when generating design solutions with and without additional dimensions of sustainability
Abstract The research presented in this paper explores how engineering students cognitively manage concept generation and measures the effects of additional dimensions of sustainability on design cognition. Twelve first-year and eight senior engineering students generated solutions to 10 design problems. Half of the problems included additional dimensions of sustainability. The number of unique design solutions students developed and their neurocognitive activation were measured. Without additional requirements for sustainability, first-year students generated significantly more solutions than senior engineering students. First-year students recruited higher cortical activation in the brain region generally associated with cognitive flexibility, and divergent and convergent thinking. Senior engineering students recruited higher activation in the brain region generally associated with uncertainty processing and self-reflection. When additional dimensions of sustainability were present, first-year students produced fewer solutions. Senior engineering students generated a similar number of solutions. Senior engineering students required less cortical activation to generate a similar number of solutions. The varying patterns of cortical activation and different number of solutions between first-year and senior engineering students begin to highlight cognitive differences in how students manage and retrieve information in their brain during design. Students’ ability to manage complex requirements like sustainability may improve with education.
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 Science
Design Science ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
19
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Design issues concerning circular economy assessment methods at the product level: a comparative analysis through a case study of a mobile tiny house Research through co-design Ilmenau’s contributions to Design Science Exploring the impact of design tool usage on design for additive manufacturing processes and outcomes Interesting and impressive: exploring design factors for product graphics interchange format to enhance engagement
×
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