Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

How do analogizing and mental simulation influence team dynamics in innovative product design?

  • Hernan Casakin (a1), Linden J. Ball (a2), Bo T. Christensen (a3) and Petra Badke-Schaub (a4)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to gain further insight into how analogical reasoning and mental simulation, two cognitive strategies, influence team dynamics in innovative product design. A particular emphasis was placed on exploring the association between these two strategies and team cohesion and team collaboration. Analogies were coded for “analogical distance” (i.e., within domain or between domain) and “analogical purpose” (i.e., problem identification, function finding, solution generation, and explanation). The results indicated that the presence of either analogizing or mental simulation was related to team cohesion and team collaboration, with mental simulation having an especially marked association with team collaboration. Within-domain analogizing was found to enhance team collaboration, but it did not influence team cohesion. Furthermore, all types of analogical purpose showed a similar association with team cohesion, whereas solution generation and function finding had a stronger association with team collaboration. We propose that analogizing and mental simulations are strategies that serve valuable functions in engendering enhanced cohesion and collaboration, which might be expected to lead to more effective design outcomes, although this remains an empirical question in need of further corroboration.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Reprint requests to: Hernan Casakin, School of Architecture, Ariel University, P.O. Box 3, 44837, Ariel, Israel. E-mail: casakin@ariel.ac.il

References

Hide All
Badke-Schaub, P., Neumann, A., & Lauche, K. (2011). An observation-based method for measuring the sharedness of mental models in teams. In Coordination in Human and Primate Groups (Boos, M., Kolbe, M., Kappeler, P.M., & Ellwart, T., Eds.), pp. 177197. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.
Badke-Schaub, P., Neumann, A., Lauche, K., & Mohammed, S. (2007). Mental models in design teams: a valid approach to performance in design collaboration? CoDesign 3 (1), 520.
Ball, L.J., & Christensen, B.T. (2009). Analogical reasoning and mental simulation in design: two strategies linked to uncertainty resolution. Design Studies 30 (2), 567589.
Ball, L.J., Lambell, N.J., Ormerod, T.C., Slavin, S., & Mariani, J.A. (2001). Representing design rationale to support innovative design re-use: a minimalist approach. Journal of Automation in Construction 10 (6), 663674.
Ball, L.J., Onarheim, B., & Christensen, B.T. (2010). Design requirements, epistemic uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design. Design Studies 31 (6), 567589.
Ball, L.J., Ormerod, T.C., & Morley, N.J. (2004). Spontaneous analogising in engineering design: a comparative analysis of experts and novices. Design Studies 25 (5), 495508.
Beal, D.J., Cohen, R.R., Burke, M.J., & McLendon, C.L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: a meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (6), 9891004.
Bearman, C.R., Ball, L.J., & Ormerod, T.C. (2007). The structure and function of spontaneous analogising in domain-based problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning 13 (3), 273294.
Bollen, K.A., & Hoyle, R.H. (1990). Perceived cohesion: a conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces 69 (2), 479504.
Carron, A.V., & Brawley, L.R. (2000). Cohesion: conceptual and measurement issues. Small Group Research 31 (1), 89106.
Casakin, H. (2004). Visual analogy as a cognitive strategy in the design process: expert versus novice performance. Journal of Design Research 4 (2).
Casakin, H. (2010). Visual analogy, visual displays, and the nature of design problems: the effect of expertise. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 37 (1), 170188.
Casakin, H. (2012). Visual analogy as a cognitive stimulator for idea generation in design problem solving. In The Psychology of Problem Solving: An Interdisciplinary Approach (Helie, S., Ed.), New York: Nova Science.
Casakin, H., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2013). The psychology of creativity: mental models in design teams. In Psychology of Creativity (Antonietti, A., Colombo, B., & Memmert, D., Eds.), pp. 167180. New York: Nova Science.
Casakin, H., & Goldschmidt, G., (1999). Expertise and the visual use of analogy: implications for design education. Design Studies 20 (2), 153175.
Casakin, H., & Goldschmidt, G. (2000). Reasoning by visual analogy in design problem-solving: the role of guidance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 27 (1), 105119.
Christensen, B.T., & Schunn, C.D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structure: the case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition 35 (1), 2938.
Christensen, B.T., & Schunn, C.D. (2009). The role and impact of mental simulation in design. Applied Cognitive Psychology 23 (3), 327344.
Clement, J.J. (2008). Creative Model Construction in Scientists and Students: The Role of Imagery, Analogy, and Mental Simulation. Dordrecht: Springer.
Coskun, H., Paulus, P.B., Brown, V., & Sherwood, J.J. (2000). Cognitive stimulation and problem presentation in idea-generating groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, & Practice 4 (4), 307329.
Dahl, D., & Wand Moreau, P. (2002). The influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation. Journal of Marketing Research 39 (1), 760.
Den Otter, A., & Emmitt, S. (2008). Design team communication and design task complexity: the preference for dialogues. Architectural Engineering and Design Management 4 (2), 121129.
Dunbar, K., & Blanchette, I. (2001). The in vivo/in vitro approach to cognition: the case of analogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (8), 334339.
Forsyth, D.R. (2010). Group Dynamics, 5th ed.Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
Fu, K., Cagan, J., & Kotovsky, K. (2010). Design team convergence: the influence of example solution quality. Journal of Mechanical Design 132 (11), 111005/1111005/11.
Gardner, R. (1997). The conversation object mm: a weak and variable acknowledging token. Research on Language & Social Interaction 30 (2), 131156.
Gentner, D. (2002). Psychology of mental models. In International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Smelser, N.J., & Bates, P.B., Eds.), pp. 96839687. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Goel, A.K., & Wiltgen, B. (2014). On the role of analogy in resolving cognitive dissonance in collaborative interdisciplinary design. In Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (Lamontagne, L., & Plaza, E., Eds.), LNCS, Vol. 8765, pp. 185199. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.
Goldschmidt, G. (1995). Visual displays for design: imagery, analogy and databases of visual images. In Visual Databases in Architecture (Koutamanis, A., Timmermans, H., & Vermeulen, I., Eds.), pp. 5374. Aldershot: Avebury.
Helms, M., Vattam, S.S., & Goel, A.K. (2009). Biologically inspired design: process and products. Design Studies 30 (5), 606622.
Helms, M., Vattam, S.S., & Goel, A.K. (2010). The effect of functional modeling on understanding complex biological systems. Proc. ASME 2010 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. and Computers & Information in Engineering Conf., pp. 107–115, Montreal, August 15–18, 2010.
Holyoak, K.J., & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983). Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kleinsmann, M.S., & Valkenburg, R. (2007). Why do(n't) actors in collaborative design understand each other? An empirical study towards a better understanding of collaborative design. CoDesign 3 (1), 5973.
Kohn, N.W., Paulus, P.B., & Choi, Y. (2011). Building on ideas of others: an examination of the idea combination process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47 (3), 544561.
Linsey, J.S., Clauss, E.F., Kurtoglu, T., Murphy, J.T., Wood, K.L., & Markman, A.B. (2011). An experimental study of group idea generation techniques: understanding the roles of idea representation and viewing methods. Journal of Mechanical Design 133 (3), 031008/1031008/15.
McDonnell, J., & Lloyd, P. (2009). About: Designing—Analysing Design Meetings. London: Taylor & Francis.
Nersessian, N.J. (2008). Creating Scientific Concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ormerod, T.C., Mariani, J.A., Ball, L.J., & Lambell, N.J. (1999). Desperado: three-in-one indexing for innovative design. Proc. 7th IFIP Conf. Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT ’99 (Sasse, M.A., & Johnson, C., Eds.), pp. 336–343. London: IOS Press.
Owen, W.F. (1985). Metaphor analysis of cohesiveness in small discussion groups. Small Group Research 16 (3), 415424.
Richardson, M., & Ball, L.J. (2009). Internal representations, external representations and ergonomics: towards a theoretical integration. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 10 (4), 335376.
Sannomiya, M., Kawaguchi, A., Yamakawa, I., & Morita, Y. (2003). Effect of backchannel utterances on facilitating idea-generation in Japanese think-aloud tasks. Psychological Reports 93 (1), 4146.
Stempfle, J., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2002). Thinking in design teams: an analysis of team communication. Design Studies 23 (5), 473496.
Trickett, S.B., & Trafton, J.G. (2002). The instantiation and use of conceptual simulations in evaluating hypotheses: movies-in-the-mind in scientific reasoning. Proc. 24th Annual Conf. Cognitive Science Society, pp. 878–883. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tseng, I., Moss, J., Cagan, J., & Kotovsky, K. (2008). The role of timing and analogical similarity in the stimulation of idea generation in design. Design Studies 29 (3), 203221.
Vattam, S.S., Helms, M.E., & Goel, A.K. (2010). A content account of creative analogies in biologically inspired design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24 (4), 467481.
Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, B.T., & Ball, L.J. (2013). Collaborative problem-solution co-evolution in creative design. Design Studies 34 (5), 515542.
Wolf, J.P. (2008). The effects of backchannels on fluency in L2 oral task production. System 36 (2), 279294.
Young, R.F., & Lee, J. (2004). Identifying units in interaction: reactive tokens in Korean and English conversations. Journal of Sociolinguistics 8 (3), 380407.

Keywords

How do analogizing and mental simulation influence team dynamics in innovative product design?

  • Hernan Casakin (a1), Linden J. Ball (a2), Bo T. Christensen (a3) and Petra Badke-Schaub (a4)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed