Show simple item record

contributor authorJoel Chan
contributor authorKatherine Fu
contributor authorChristian Schunn
contributor authorJonathan Cagan
contributor authorKristin Wood
contributor authorKenneth Kotovsky
date accessioned2017-05-09T00:45:46Z
date available2017-05-09T00:45:46Z
date copyrightAugust, 2011
date issued2011
identifier issn1050-0472
identifier otherJMDEDB-27951#081004_1.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/147015
description abstractDrawing inspiration from examples by analogy can be a powerful tool for innovative design during conceptual ideation but also carries the risk of negative design outcomes (e.g., design fixation), depending on key properties of examples. Understanding these properties is critical for effectively harnessing the power of analogy. The current research explores how variations in analogical distance, commonness, and representation modality influence the effects of examples on conceptual ideation. Senior-level engineering students generated solution concepts for an engineering design problem with or without provided examples drawn from the U.S. Patent database. Examples were crossed by analogical distance (near-field vs. far-field), commonness (more vs. less-common), and modality (picture vs. text). A control group that received no examples was included for comparison. Effects were examined on a mixture of ideation process and product variables. Our results show positive effects of far-field and less-common examples on novelty and variability in quality of solution concepts. These effects are not modulated by modality. However, detailed analyses of process variables suggest divergent inspiration pathways for far-field vs. less-common examples. Additionally, the combination of far-field, less-common examples resulted in more novel concepts than in the control group. These findings suggest guidelines for the effective design and implementation of design-by-analogy methods, particularly a focus on far-field, less-common examples during the ideation process.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleOn the Benefits and Pitfalls of Analogies for Innovative Design: Ideation Performance Based on Analogical Distance, Commonness, and Modality of Examples
typeJournal Paper
journal volume133
journal issue8
journal titleJournal of Mechanical Design
identifier doi10.1115/1.4004396
journal fristpage81004
identifier eissn1528-9001
keywordsDesign AND Project tasks
treeJournal of Mechanical Design:;2011:;volume( 133 ):;issue: 008
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record