1. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN
CREATIVITY IS EXHAUSTED?
DESIGN TOOLS AS AN AID
FOR IDEATION
Colin M. Gray1, Colleen M. Seifert2,
Seda Yilmaz1, Shanna R. Daly2, & Richard Gonzalez2
1Iowa State University; 2University of Michigan

2. HOW DO WE CREATE
NOVEL & CREATIVE
CONCEPTS?
Photo courtesy of Rennet Stowe
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tomsaint/2987926396
AND HOW DO WE
KNOW WHEN WE
NEED HELP?

3. INSTRUMENTAL JUDGMENT
an understanding and value for design tools,
methods, and strategies
(Cross, 2011; Nelson & Stolterman, 2012;
Stolterman, 2008)

4. INSTRUMENTAL JUDGMENT
TOOLS,
METHODS, &
STRATEGIES
Reframing design
problems
(Akin & Akin, 1996;
Smith & Linsey, 2011)
Imposing constraints
(Biskjaer & Halskov, 2014;
Finke et al., 1992)
Visual or analogical
supports
(Cheng, Mugge, & Schoormans,
2014; Viswanathan & Linsey,
2012, 2013)
JUDGMENTS THAT
RELATE TO USE OF
THESE TOOLS?

5. THE CHALLENGE
A focus on cognitive tools has generally neglected
how students are intended to develop their
abilities with these tools…
AND
Beginning designers need to develop sensibilities
surrounding their use of tools in the design process.
(Self et al., 2014; Stolterman et al., 2008)

6. What happens when students use a
cognitive support only after their
own ability to generate concepts is
exhausted, and what implications
does this has for the development
of pedagogical experiences that
encourage idea fluency?

7. DESIGN HEURISTICS
• Provides prompts to help designers generate alternatives that
vary in nature, discouraging fixation and encouraging divergent
patterns of thinking (Yilmaz, Daly, Seifert, & Gonzalez, 2011; Yilmaz, Seifert, &
Gonzalez, 2010)
• Derived from empirical evidence of industrial and engineering
designs (Daly et al., 2012; Yilmaz, Christian, Daly, Seifert, & Gonzalez, 2012;
Yilmaz & Seifert, 2010)
• Validated through a range of product analysis, case studies,
and protocol analyses, in both educational and professional
contexts (e.g., Yilmaz & Seifert, 2009; Yilmaz et al., 2011; Yilmaz et al., 2010;
Yilmaz et al., 2013; Yilmaz, Daly, Christian, Seifert, & Gonzalez, 2014)

8. DESIGN HEURISTICS

9. PARTICIPANTS
• Sophomore undergraduate industrial design class at a large
Midwestern university
• 34 students (12 females and 22 males), aged 19 to 22

10. IDEATION SESSION
Please design a seating unit. Generate
as many solutions as you can.
BRAINSTORMING
30 MINUTES
DESIGN HEURISTICS
30 MINUTES
LEARN
10 MINUTES
“
”

11. ANALYSIS
• Consensual Assessment Technique with two raters, blind
to condition (Amabile, 1982)
• Rated on four concept characteristics, using a 7-point scale
• Linear mixed model of scores from both raters
• Intra-class correlation (ICC) to test for rater consistency and
agreement

12. HOW MUCH CAN A COGNITIVE
SUPPORT TOOL EXPAND IDEA
GENERATION AFTER EXHAUSTION?
BRAINSTORMING
6.06 CONCEPTS
(sd=1.43)
205 CONCEPTS
DESIGN HEURISTICS
2.76 CONCEPTS
(sd=0.96)
93 CONCEPTS

13. CONCEPT CHARACTERISTICS
(adapted from Dean, Hender, Rodgers, & Santanen, 2006)
NOVELTY
The degree to which an idea is original and modifies a paradigm
WORKABILITY/FEASIBILITY
The degree to which an idea can be easily implemented and does not
violate constraints
RELEVANCE
An idea is relevant if it applies to the stated problem and will be
effective at solving the problem
SPECIFICITY
The degree to which an idea is specific (i.e., worked out in detail)

14. ARE THERE CHARACTERISTIC
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
CONCEPTS BY METHOD?
Average
Ranking
Working
On Own
(SD)
Average
Ranking With
Design
Heuristics
(SD)
Z p
ICC agreement ICC consistency
No DH DH No DH DH
Novelty
3.841
(1.1549)
4.280
(1.0695)
-2.513 0.014 0.79 0.71 0.82 0.71
Specificity
3.220
(1.3007)
3.855
(1.3744)
-5.276 0.000 0.86 0.87 0.86 0.87
Relevance
3.900
(1.3297)
4.188
(1.1466)
-2.588 0.011 0.77 0.69 0.87 0.72
Feasibility
4.561
(1.1589)
4.360
(1.1618)
1.312 0.192 0.34 0.46 0.81 0.77

15. HOW DOES A COGNITIVE SUPPORT
TOOL INFLUENCE IDEA GENERATION?
THE AMBIENT CHAIR
Chair has a built in “roof” which will
provide over-head lighting
THE POD
Solid, partially enclosed chair that
allows for 360° movement (chair is
fixed in place)

16. HOW DOES A COGNITIVE SUPPORT
TOOL INFLUENCE IDEA GENERATION?
RUSSIAN DOLL CHAIR
3 chairs in one, 1st layer is comfortable
padding, 2nd is sturdy metal frame + 3rd
is a stool. All chairs would be functional
by themselves
THE CAROUSEL
Four chairs are attached to a
center coffee table.
#41: LAYER #47: MIRROR OR ARRAY

17. QUALITY OF
CONCEPTS
INCREASED
DISCUSSION
Design Heuristics is a cognitive tool to
combat creative “exhaustion”
QUANTITY OF
CONCEPTS
DECREASED
BUT

18. DISCUSSION
COGNITIVE SUPPORTS AS JUST-IN-TIME SCAFFOLDING
• Supports are related to specific pedagogical contexts, and
cannot be viewed only in abstraction
• Knowing when to introduce cognitive tools based on known
instructional barriers (and those yet to be discovered)
• Starting the process of self-learning that will be relevant in
future professional work

19. DISCUSSION
DEVELOPING STUDENTS’ TOOL SENSIBILITY
• Building instrumental judgment: not only objective
knowledge of the tool, but how and when to use it
• Increasing our understanding of key cognitive and emotive
qualities that may increase receptivity to new cognitive
supports
• Heightening the role of cognitive tools/supports in
developing a designer’s conceptual repertoire

20. CONCLUSION &
FUTURE WORK
• Triangulation with other data sources to understand
individual students’ perception of their developing
instrumental judgments
• Clarifying the nature of instrumental judgment, particularly
within disciplinary and identity framings
• Learning to capitalize on exhausted creative states is a
key area for future instructional development,
developing pedagogical experiences that increase
students’ design expertise

21. THANK YOU
This research is funded by the National Science Foundation, Division of Undergraduate Education,
Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
(TUES Type II) Grants # 1323251 and #1322552. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the National Science Foundation.
COLINGRAY.ME
DESIGNHEURISTICS.COM