بررسی نقش مؤلفه های شناختی شهود، استدلال نوآورانه و خبرگی در فرایند تفکر طراحی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری طراحی صنعتی، گروه طراحی صنعتی، دانشکدگان هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه طراحی صنعتی، دانشکدگان هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

3 استادیار گروه طراحی صنعتی، دانشکده هنرهای کاربردی، دانشگاه هنر ایران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

حل مسئله به شیوه طراحان، در مواجهه با مسائل پیچیده و مبهم، بیش از آنکه مبتنی بر تحلیل خطی و فرایندهای صرفاً منطقی باشد، بر تعامل سه مؤلفه شناختیِ شهود، استدلال نوآورانه و خبرگی استوار است. در شرایط مبهم و عدم قطعیت که ویژگی اصلی مسائل پیچیده پیش‌ روی انسان معاصر است، حل مسئله به شیوه طراحان، اثربخش‌تر از شیوه‌های تحلیلی و منطقی است. لذا، حوزه طراحی باید بر پرورش مهارت‌ها و توانمندی‌هایی متمرکز شود که استفاده از آن‌ها به تولید راه‌حل‌های بدیع و متناسب با مسائل مذکور می‌انجامد؛ اما نقش سه مؤلفه شناختی شهود، استدلال نوآورانه و خبرگی در طراحی چیست و چه جایگاهی در فرایند تفکر طراحی دارند؟ هدف این پژوهش، معرفی و تحلیل کاربرد مؤلفه‌های مذکور در فرایند طراحی و تأکید بر آموزش آن‌ها در حوزه حل مسئله به شیوه طراحانه است. این پژوهش از نظر هدف، بنیادی و با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و با بهره‌گیری از تحلیل مفهومی و استنتاج منطقی، بر پایه فیش‌برداری کتابخانه‌ای صورت گرفته است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد شهود به‌عنوان سازوکار ادراک سریع الگوها در شرایط عدم قطعیت عمل می‌کند، استدلال نوآورانه فرایند تولید و بسط فرضیه‌های بدیع را سامان می‌دهد و خبرگی بستر انباشت تجربه و تشخیص موقعیت را فراهم می‌آورد. تعامل پویا و غیرخطی این سه مؤلفه، چارچوب شناختی حل مسئله طراحانه را شکل می‌دهد؛ به‌گونه‌ای که شهود بدون خبرگی به حدس تقلیل می‌یابد، استدلال نوآورانه بدون شهود خلاقیت خود را از دست می‌دهد و خبرگی بدون نوآوری به تکرار می‌انجامد. نتایج این پژوهش می‌تواند مبنایی برای بازنگری در برنامه‌های آموزشی طراحی و تقویت آموزش مهارت‌های شناختی مؤثر در تفکر طراحانه فراهم آورد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


Badke-Schaub, P., & Eris, O. (2014). A theoretical approach to intuition in design: Does design methodology need to account for unconscious processes? An anthology of theories and models of design: Philosophy, approaches and empirical explorations, 353-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_17
Badke-Schaub, P., & Voute, E. (2018). Design methodology: Where do you go?. In DS 92: Proceedings of the Design 2018 15th International Design Conference (pp. 25-32). https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0550
Bear, A., & Rand, D. G. (2016). Intuition, deliberation, and the evolution of cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(4), 936-941. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517780113
Burke, L. A., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2011). Integrating intuition in higher education: A perspective from business management. In Handbook of intuition research. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857936370.00031 Cambridge Cognition. (2015, August 19). What is cognition? https://cambridgecognition.com/what-is-cognition/ Carbon, C. C. (2019). Psychology of design. Design science, 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2019.25
Çizgen, G., & Ulusu Uraz, T. (2019). The unknown position of intuition in design activity. The Design Journal, 22(3), 257-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2019.1589414
Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-301-9
Cross, N., Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. (1994). Design expertise amongst student designers. Journal of Art & Design Education, 13(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.1994.tb00356.x
Çizgen, G. (2019). Explorative investigation of intuition in design activity [Doctoral dissertation, Eastern Mediterranean University]. Eastern Mediterranean University Repository. http://i-rep.emu.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/handle/11129/5724
Dane, E. (2011). Capturing intuitions ‘in flight’: Observations from research on attention and mindfulness. In Handbook of intuition research (pp. 217–226). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857936370.00029
Dijksterhuis, A. (2004). Think different: The merits of unconscious thought in preference development and decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 586–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.586
Dörfler, V., & Ackermann, F. (2012). Understanding intuition: The case for two forms of intuition. Management Learning, 43(5), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507611434686
Dorst, K., & Reymen, I. M. M. J. (2004). Levels of expertise in design education. In DS 33: Proceedings of E&PDE 2004, the 7th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (pp. 159–166).
Dunne, D. D., & Dougherty, D. (2016). Abductive reasoning: How innovators navigate in the labyrinth of complex product innovation. Organization Studies, 37(2), 131–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840615604501
Durling, D. (1999). Intuition in design. In Bulletin of 4th Asian Design Conference International Symposium on Design Science. Nagaoka, Japan.
Epstein, S. (2010). Demystifying intuition: What it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychological Inquiry, 21(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2010.523875
Friedman, K. (2019). Design education today: Challenges, opportunities, failures [Chatterjee Global Lecture]. College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning, University of Cincinnati.
Furniss, L. (2020). Beyond discipline: Evolving design practice and design education in the twenty-first century. Architecture_MPS, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.amps.2020v18i1.004
Goffin, K., & Koners, U. (2011). Tacit knowledge, lessons learnt, and new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(2), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00798
Hay, L., Cash, P., & McKilligan, S. (2020). The future of design cognition analysis. Design Science, 6, e20. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.20
Iannello, P., Antonietti, A., & Betsch, C. (2011). Intuition in teaching. In Handbook of intuition research. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857936370
Johannesson, P., & Perjons, E. (2014). An introduction to design science. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78132-3
Kalyani, R. (2019). Understanding user search processes across varying cognitive levels. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342220.3343643
Kiely, K. M. (2014). Cognitive function. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_426
Koskela, L., Paavola, S., & Kroll, E. (2018). The role of abduction in production of new ideas in design. Advancements in the Philosophy of Design, 153–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73302-9_8
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krch, D. (2011). Cognitive processing. In J. S. Kreutzer, J. DeLuca, & B. Caplan (Eds.), Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_1443
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Elsevier.
Ling, T., Xiao, Y. G., & Badke-Schaub, P. G. (2014). How intuition affects designers’ decision making: An interview study. In DS 77: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 13th International Design Conference (pp. 537–548).
Lloyd, P., & Scott, P. (1994). Discovering the design problem. Design Studies, 15(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(94)90020-5
Lu, S. C. Y., & Liu, A. (2012). Abductive reasoning for design synthesis. CIRP Annals, 61(1), 143–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2012.03.062
Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020). Changing design education for the 21st century. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(1), 13–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002
Myerson, J. (2016). Scaling down: Why designers need to reverse their thinking. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(4), 288–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.06.001
Orbey, B., & Sarıoğlu Erdoğdu, G. P. (2021). Design process re-visited in the first year design studio: Between intuition and reasoning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31, 771–795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09573-2
Papalambros, P. (2015). Design science: Why, what and how. Design Science, 1, E1. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2015.1 Patterson, R. E., & Eggleston, R. G. (2017). Intuitive cognition. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 11(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343416686476
Raami, A. (2015). Intuition unleashed: On the application and development of intuition in the creative process [Doctoral thesis, Aalto University].
Raami, A., Mielonen, S., & Keinänen, M. (2010). Designer's experiences of intuition: Coaching intuitive skills as part of creative design process. In Cumulus Working Papers G. Conference Proceedings (pp. 52–57). Cumulus Association, Aalto University.
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. Oxford University Press. Root-Bernstein, R., & Root-Bernstein, M. (2003). Intuitive tools for innovative thinking. In International handbook on innovation (pp. 377–387). Elsevier Science.
Rowe, A., & Takach, B. S. (Eds.). (2014). Design education: Approaches, explorations and perspectives. Department of Art and Design, University of Alberta.
Sanders, L. (2008). An evolving map of design practice and design research. Interactions, 15(6), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/1409040.1409043
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Huotilainen, M., Mäkelä, M., Groth, C., & Hakkarainen, K. (2016). How can neuroscience help understand design and craft activity? The promise of cognitive neuroscience in design studies. FORMakademisk. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.1478
Shavinina, L. V. (2003). Understanding scientific innovation: The case of Nobel Laureates. In The international handbook on innovation (1st ed.). Elsevier Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044198-6/50031-0
Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial (2nd ed.). MIT Press. (Original work published 1969)
Spence, C., & Gallace, A. (2007). Recent developments in the study of tactile attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(3), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1037/CJEP2007021
Tang, H.-H., & Gero, J. S. (2001). Sketches as affordances of meanings in the design process. In J. S. Gero, B. Tversky, & T. Purcell (Eds.), Visual and spatial reasoning in design II (pp. 271–282). Key Center of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney.
Tebyani, K., Ajdari, A., & Bagheri Taleghani, E. (2021). Investigating the factors affecting the intuitive thinking of designers in the design process. Journal of Visual and Applied Arts, 14(32), 5–22.
Tondi, A., & Amraee, B. (2019). Revision of the theory of design as a discipline: Content analysis of contemporary design methodology. Theoretical Principles of Visual Arts, 4(1), 141–154.
Tschimmel, K. (2004). A new discipline in design education: Cognitive processes in design. In DS 33: Proceedings of E&PDE 2004, the 7th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (pp. 175–184).
Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention and the arts creativity. John Wiley & Sons.
Wertheimer, M. (1982). Productive thinking (Enlarged ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Yee, J. (2012). Implications for research training and examination for design PhDs. In The Sage handbook of digital dissertations and theses (pp. 461–492). Sage.