Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T22:58:10.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing entropy measures of idea links in design protocols: Linkography entropy measurement and analysis of differently conditioned design sessions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2007

Jeff W.T. Kan ,
Zafer Bilda  and
John S. Gero
Jeff W.T. Kan
Affiliation:
Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Zafer Bilda
Affiliation:
Creativity and Cognition Studios, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
John S. Gero
Affiliation:
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study and Volgenau School of Information Technology and Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores using Shannon's entropy of information to measure linkographs of 12 design sessions that involved six architects in two different experimental conditions. The aim is to find a quantitative tool to interpret the linkographs. This study examines if the differences in the design processes and the design outcomes can be reflected in the entropic interpretations. The results show that the overall entropy of one design condition is slightly higher than the other. Further, there are indications that the change of entropy might reflect design outcomes.

Keywords

Design MeasurementDesign ProtocolsDesign OutcomesEntropy
Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , November 2007 , pp. 367 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Athavankar, U.A. (1997). Mental imagery as a design tool. Cybernetics and Systems 28, 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A.D. (1986). Working Memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A.D., Emsile, H., Kolodny, J., & Duncan, J. (1998). Random generation and executive control of working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 51A, 819–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballard, D.H., Hayhoe, M.M., & Pelz, J.B. (1995). Memory representations in natural tasks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 7, 66–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bilda, Z., & Gero, J.S. (2007). The impact of working memory limitations on the design process during conceptualization. Design Studies 28(4), 343–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilda, Z., Gero, J.S., & Purcell, A.T. (2006). To sketch or not to sketch: that is the question. Design Studies 27(5), 589–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, T. (2003). Falling Water Rising: Frank Lloyd Wright, E. J. Kaufmann, and America's Most Extraordinary House. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (1990). Linkography: assessing design productivity. In Cyberbetics and System '90 Trappl, R.291–298. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (1992). Criteria for design evaluation: a process-oriented paradigm. In Evaluating and Predicting Design Performance Kalay, Y.E.67–79. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (1995). The designer as a team of one. Design Studies 16(2), 189–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kan, W.T., & Gero, J.S. (2005). Can entropy indicate the richness of idea generation in team designing? Proc. CAADRI'05 Bhatt, A. Vol. 1, pp. 451–457. New Delhi: TVB.Google Scholar
Kan, W.T., & Gero, J.S. (in press). Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designing. Design Studies.Google Scholar
Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychology Review 63, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearson, D.G., Logie, R.H., & Gilhooly, K.J. (1999). Verbal representations and spatial manipulations during mental synthesis. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 11(3), 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petre, M., & Blackwell, A.F. (1999). Mental imagery in program design and visual programming. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 51(1), 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, W.A., & Christie, D.F.M. (1997). Components of visual memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 29, 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schön, D.A., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies 13(2), 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27, 397–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suwa, M., Purcell, T., & Gero, J.S. (1998). Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions. Design Studies 19(4), 455–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Lugt, R. (2003). Relating the quality of the idea generation process to the quality of the resulting design ideas. Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED), pp. 19–21, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Walker, P., Hitch, G., & Duroe, A. (1993). The effect of visual similarity on short-term memory for spatial location: implications for the capacity of visual short-term memory. Acta Psychologica 83, 203–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed