The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Decision methods for design: Insights from psychology

Decision methods for design: Insights from psychology
Decision methods for design: Insights from psychology

This work aims at stimulating constructive conversation about decision methods in engineering design by using insights from psychology. I point out that any decision method has two components: coherence, which refers to internal consistency (do design choices satisfy a logical axiom?) and correspondence, which refers to external effectiveness (does a design concept satisfy a functional requirement?). Some researchers argue for "rational" methods such as multi-attribute utility theory, whereas others argue for "heuristics" such as the Pugh process, and the coherence/ correspondence distinction can clarify this debate in two ways. First, by analyzing statements in the design literature, I argue that the debate is essentially about different strategies for achieving correspondence: Multi-attribute utility theory aims at achieving coherence with the expectation that coherence will imply correspondence, whereas the Pugh process aims at directly achieving correspondence. Second, I propose a new research question for design: "Under what conditions does achieving coherence imply achieving correspondence?"

concept generation, creativity, decision theory
1050-0472
Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V.
b97c23d9-8b24-4225-8da4-be7ac2a14fba
Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V.
b97c23d9-8b24-4225-8da4-be7ac2a14fba

Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V. (2012) Decision methods for design: Insights from psychology. Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 134 (8), [084504]. (doi:10.1115/1.4007001).

Record type: Article

Abstract

This work aims at stimulating constructive conversation about decision methods in engineering design by using insights from psychology. I point out that any decision method has two components: coherence, which refers to internal consistency (do design choices satisfy a logical axiom?) and correspondence, which refers to external effectiveness (does a design concept satisfy a functional requirement?). Some researchers argue for "rational" methods such as multi-attribute utility theory, whereas others argue for "heuristics" such as the Pugh process, and the coherence/ correspondence distinction can clarify this debate in two ways. First, by analyzing statements in the design literature, I argue that the debate is essentially about different strategies for achieving correspondence: Multi-attribute utility theory aims at achieving coherence with the expectation that coherence will imply correspondence, whereas the Pugh process aims at directly achieving correspondence. Second, I propose a new research question for design: "Under what conditions does achieving coherence imply achieving correspondence?"

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 23 July 2012
Published date: 1 August 2012
Keywords: concept generation, creativity, decision theory

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 438596
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/438596
ISSN: 1050-0472
PURE UUID: e9a987df-d6f3-4575-99d5-e7500f3b3e56
ORCID for Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9572-1980

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 18 Mar 2020 17:30
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:44

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×