Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-14T03:26:49.239Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the Role of Linguistic Abstraction in Idea-Generation Sessions

Part of: Design Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Rafaella Antoniou ,
Elies Dekoninck  and
Jérémy Bonvoisin

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

For many years, both academia and industry have been interested in increasing the efficiency of idea- generation meetings. Alex Osborne's (1953) rules for brainstorming are an early attempt to do so, and have extensively been used in engineering design, however their effectiveness has been questioned with recent research, and a need for fundamental research to establish which practices are useful arises. This study is an attempt in investigating linguistic abstraction in idea-generation meetings, in order to establish whether any best practices can be distilled from the language used. Engineering design group meetings were recorded and transcribed, and was analysed using a coding framework which was developed for analysing linguistic categories as well as the ideas that were generated during those meetings. More particularly, the study investigates the average abstractness/concreteness of speech throughout the duration of the meetings, as well as the switching between abstract and concrete language and vice versa while comparing idea-related discourse and non-idea related discourse switching. The coding framework proposed is considered robust enough to carry out further work.

Keywords

CreativityDesign practiceDesign engineering
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 329 - 338
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Aitchison, J. (2003), Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. 3rd ed. Massachusetts: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Becattini, N., Borgianni, Y., Cascini, G. and Rotini, F. (2012), “Model and algorithm for computer-aided inventive problem analysis”. Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 44 No. 10, pp. 961–986.Google Scholar
Caro, T.M., Roper, R., Young, M. and Dank, G.R. (1979), “Inter-Observer Reliability”. Behaviour, Vol. 69 No. 3–4, pp. 303–315.Google Scholar
Gómez-Jiménez, M. (2013), “Study on Judgement Practice and Effect within Engineering Design Brainstorms”. Dissertation (MSc). University of Bath.Google Scholar
Howard, T.J. (2008), “Information Management for Creative Stimuli in Engineering Design”. Thesis (PhD). University of Bath.Google Scholar
Langer, S. K. (1953), Feeling and Form: a Theory of Art Developed from Philosophy in a New Key. USA: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Linley, A. (2013), “Design Team Study: Comparing the Usefulness of Rules & No Rules in Engineering Design Brainstorming?” Final Year Project Report (MEng). University of Bath.Google Scholar
Kamarudin, K. M., Ridgway, K. and Ismail, N. (2016), “Abstraction and Generalization in Conceptual Design Process: Involving Safety Principles in TRIZ-SDA Environment.” Procedia CIRP, Vol. 39, pp. 16–21.Google Scholar
Kokotovich, V. and Dorst, K. (2016), “The art of ‘stepping back’: Studying levels of abstraction in a diverse design team”. Design Studies, Vol. 46, pp. 79–94.Google Scholar
Osborn, A.F. (1953), Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving. 3rd revised ed. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Owen, C.L. (1992), “Context for creativity”. Design Studies, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 216–228.Google Scholar
Oxford Dictionaries (2018), “‘Abstract’ [Online]”. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available from: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/abstract [Accessed 2 March 2018].Google Scholar
Oxford Dictionaries (2018), “‘Idea’ [Online]”. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available from: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/idea [Accessed 20 March 2018].Google Scholar
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C. and Madigan, S. A. (1968), “Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns”. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 1, Pt.2, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
Rodd, J., Gaskell, G. and Marslen-Wilson. (2000), “The Advantages and Disadvantages of Semantic Ambiguity”. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Vol. 22.Google Scholar
Semin, G.R. and Fiedler, K. (1988), “The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 558–568.Google Scholar
Sonalkar, N.S., Mabogunje, A.O. and Leifer, L.J. (2012), “A visual representation to characterize moment to moment concept generation in design teams”. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity (ICDC2012), 18th-20th September 2012 Glasgow. Stanford, USA: Center for Design Research, Stanford University pp. 199–208.Google Scholar