Hierarchical thinking: a cognitive tool for guiding coherent decision making in design problem solving

被引:0
作者
Grietjie Haupt
机构
[1] University of Pretoria,Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education
来源
International Journal of Technology and Design Education | 2018年 / 28卷
关键词
Design cognition; Decision making; Hierarchical thinking; 4-Level decision making tool; Problem solving; Intentions; Multi-directional transformation;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This paper builds on two concepts, the first of which is the extended information processing model of expert design cognition. This proposes twelve internal psychological characteristics interacting with the external world of expert designers during the early phases of the design process. Here, I explore one of the characteristics, hierarchical abstraction, and adapt it into an alternative ontological model of decision making. The model serves as an in-depth descriptor of how designers from different domains transform their mental states using judgment and decision making through hierarchical abstraction. The second concept entails an expansion of the idea of synergistic vertical transformation as a framework for mapping expert designers’ design process. Here, I focus on hierarchical decision making as multi-directional, and inter-relating the internal and external world of designers. In doing so, I provide a coding tool for researchers interested in exploring designers’ complex decision making processes. Concurrently, the model serves as decision making tool in design and technology education classrooms. As such, the paper focuses on the ontology of conceptual structures that support the early phases of the design process. This was based on empirical research.
引用
收藏
页码:207 / 237
页数:30
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Anderson ML(2003)Embodied cognition: A field guide Artificial Intelligence 149 91-130
  • [2] Anthony WS(1973)Learning to discover rules by discovery Journal of Educational Psychology 64 325-328
  • [3] Brandstatter V(2003)Goals need implementation intentions: The model of action phases tested in the applied setting of continuing education European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 12 37-59
  • [4] Heimbeck D(2006)Formative assessment of classroom concept maps: The reasonable fallible analyser Journal of Interactive Learning Research 17 15-36
  • [5] Malzacher JT(2004)The grounding of a discipline: Cognition and instruction in technology education International Journal of Technology and Design Education 14 61-77
  • [6] Frese M(1999)Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design The Journal of the Learning Sciences 8 391-450
  • [7] Conlan T(2006)The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic. Why the adjustments are insufficient Psychological Science 17 311-318
  • [8] de Miranda MA(2013)Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective Performance Improvement Quarterly 26 43-71
  • [9] Edelson DC(2013)A canonical theory of dynamic decision-making Frontiers in Psychology 4 1-19
  • [10] Gordin DN(2015)Gestalt principles of creating learning business ontologies for knowledge codification Knowledge Management Research & Practice 13 418-428