But Is It Creative? Delineating the Impact of Expertise and Concept Ratings on Creative Concept Selection

被引:25
作者
Gosnell, Christopher A. [1 ]
Miller, Scarlett R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Penn State Univ, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
conceptual design; design evaluation; design theory and methodology; product design; IDEA GENERATION; SYSTEMATIC-APPROACH; DESIGN; VALIDATION; KNOWLEDGE; NOVELTY; QUALITY; UTILITY; RATERS; MODEL;
D O I
10.1115/1.4031904
中图分类号
TH [机械、仪表工业];
学科分类号
0802 ;
摘要
While creativity is often stressed in the conceptual phases of design, it is rarely considered during the concept selection process. Before effective methods can be developed to aid in creative concept section, however, differences in the perceptions of creativity between expert and novice designers and the influence of creativity evaluation methods on the process must be considered. Therefore, this paper was developed to address these questions by studying 11 expert and 11 novice designers. Specifically the study was developed to understand if experts' and novices' perception of a concepts creativity aligned, to introduce and compare the utility of our tool for assessing semantic creativity (TASC) to existing creativity evaluation methods, and to identify if our TASC method could be used as a proxy for expert evaluators. Our findings reveal that experts and novices generally had similar perceptions of a concept's creativity and that the TASC method was tapping into similar constructs of human perceptions of concept creativity. The results of this study contribute to our understanding of the factors that influence the selection or filtering of creative ideas after idea generation and provide a framework for research in this field.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 78 条
[2]   An investigation of factors affecting how engineers and scientists seek information [J].
Anderson, CJ ;
Glassman, M ;
McAfee, RB ;
Pinelli, T .
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 2001, 18 (02) :131-155
[3]   SKILL ACQUISITION - COMPILATION OF WEAK-METHOD PROBLEM SOLUTIONS [J].
ANDERSON, JR .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1987, 94 (02) :192-210
[4]  
[Anonymous], DETC201028802 ASME
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2017, Fuzzy Logic With Engineering Applications
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1988, MATH MODELS DECISION, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-83555-1_5
[7]   Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners [J].
Atman, Cynthia J. ;
Adams, Robin S. ;
Cardella, Monica E. ;
Turns, Jennifer ;
Mosborg, Susan ;
Saleem, Jason .
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2007, 96 (04) :359-379
[8]   Is working memory still working? [J].
Baddeley, AD .
EUROPEAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 2002, 7 (02) :85-97
[9]   Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: An examination of leader-leader interactions [J].
Bedell-Avers, Katrina ;
Hunter, Samuel T. ;
Angie, Amanda D. ;
Eubanks, Dawn L. ;
Mumford, Michael D. .
LEADERSHIP QUARTERLY, 2009, 20 (03) :299-315
[10]  
Benedek J., 2002, MEASURING DESIRABILI, P8