0
Research Papers: Design Theory and Methodology

Object Reorientation and Creative Performance

[+] Author and Article Information
A.-M. Oltețeanu

Bremen Spatial Cognition Center,
University of Bremen,
Enrique-Schmidt-Straße 5,
Bremen 28359, Germany
e-mail: amoodu@informatik.uni-bremen.de

L. H. Shu

Department of Mechanical and
Industrial Engineering,
University of Toronto,
5 King's College Road,
Toronto, ON M5S 3G8, Canada
e-mail: shu@mie.utoronto.ca

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Theory and Methodology Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received February 23, 2017; final manuscript received September 6, 2017; published online January 16, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Irem Tumer.

J. Mech. Des 140(3), 031102 (Jan 16, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: MD-17-1168; doi: 10.1115/1.4038264 History: Received February 23, 2017; Revised September 06, 2017

Functional fixedness refers to a cognitive bias that prevents people from using objects in new ways and more abstractly from perceiving problems in new ways. Supporting people in overcoming functional fixedness could improve creative problem solving and capacities for creative design. A study was conducted to detect whether a relationship exists between participants' tendency to reorient objects presented as stimuli in an alternative uses test (AUT) and their creativity, also measured using the Wallach Kogan (WaKo) pattern meanings test. The AUT measures creativity as a function of identifying alternative uses for traditional objects. The WaKo pattern meanings test detects the ability to see an abstract pattern as different possible objects or scenes. Also studied is whether Kruglanski's need for closure (NFC) scale, a psychological measure, can predict the ability to incorporate reorientation cues when identifying uses. This study revealed highly significant, high correlations between reorientation and several creativity measures, and a correlation between reorientation and the predictability subscale of the NFC scale. A qualitative exploration of participants' responses reveals further metrics that may be relevant to assessing creativity in the AUT.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Topics: Creativity
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Duncker, K. , 1945, “ On Problem Solving,” Psychol. Monogr., 58(5), p. i-113.
Batchelder, W. H. , and Alexander, G. E. , 2012, “ Insight Problem Solving: A Critical Examination of the Possibility of Formal Theory,” J. Probl. Solving, 5(1), pp. 56–100.
Ohlsson, S. , 1984, “ Restructuring Revisited—I: Summary and Critique of the Gestalt Theory of Problem Solving,” Scand. J. Psychol., 25(1), pp. 65–78. [CrossRef]
Ohlsson, S. , 1984, “ Restructuring Revisited—II: An Information Processing Theory of Restructuring and Insight,” Scand. J. Psychol., 25(2), pp. 117–129. [CrossRef]
Oltețeanu, A.-M. , 2015, “ ‘Seeing As' and Re-Representation: Their Relation to Insight, Creative Problem-Solving and Types of Creativity,” Workshop Computational Creativity, Concept Invention, and General Intelligence, Publications of the Institute of Cognitive Science, Osnabrück, Germany, Paper No. 4. http://www.academia.edu/18979049/_Seeing_as_and_Re-representation_Their_Relation_to_Insight_Creative_Problem-Solving_and_Types_of_Creativity
Guilford, J. P. , 1956, “ The Structure of Intellect,” Psychol. Bull., 53(4), p. 267. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Guilford, J. P. , 1967, The Nature of Human Intelligence, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Zeki, S. , 2004, “ The Neurology of Ambiguity,” Conscious. Cognit., 13(1), pp. 173–196. [CrossRef]
Kruglanski, A. , and Webster, D. K. A. , 1993, “ Motivated Resistance and Openness to Persuasion in the Presence or Absence of Prior Information,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 65(5), pp. 861–876. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Plaks, J. , 2011, The Social Psychology of Motivation, Oxford University Press, Don Mills, ON, Canada.
Webster, D. , and Kruglanski, A. , 1994, “ Individual Differences in Need for Cognitive Closure,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 67(6), pp. 1049–1062. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Toh, C. , and Miller, S. , 2016, “The Preferences for Creativity Scale (PCS): Identifying the Underlying Constructs of Creative Concept Selection,” ASME Paper No. DETC2016-60414.
Lai, S. L. , and Shu, L. H. , 2016, “ Individual Differences in Tendency for Design Fixation,” Design Computing & Cognition, Evanston, IL, June 27–29, pp. 321–338.
Lai, S.-L. , and Shu, L. H. , 2014, “ Do-It-Yourselfers as Lead Users for Environmentally Conscious Behavior,” Procedia CIRP, 15C, pp. 431–436.
Kumar, V. , and Mocko, G. , 2016, “Similarity of Engineering Design Problems to Enable Reuse in Design Research Experiments,” ASME Paper No. DETC2016-60474.
Marshall, K. S. , Crawford, R. , and Jensen, D. , 2016, “Analogy Seeded Mind-Maps: A Comparison of Verbal and Pictorial Representation of Analogies in the Concept Generation Process,” ASME Paper No. DETC2016-60100.
Lenau, T. A. , Keshwani, S. , Chakrabarti, A. , and Ahmed-Kristensen, S. , 2015, “Biocards and Level of Abstraction,” 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED), Milan, Italy, July 27–30, pp. 177–186. https://www.designsociety.org/publication/37706/biocards_and_level_of_abstraction
Wallach, M. A. , and Kogan, N. , 1965, Modes of Thinking in Young Children: A Study of the Creativity-Intelligence Distinction, Holt Rinehart & Winston, New York.
Linsey, J. S. , Tseng, I. , Fu, K. , Cagan, J. , Wood, K. L. , and Schunn, C. D. , 2010, “ A Study of Design Fixation, Its Mitigation and Perception in Design Faculty,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(4), p. 041003. [CrossRef]
Linsey, J. S. , Clauss, E. F. , Kurtoglu, T. , Murphy, J. T. , Wood, K. L. , and Markman, A. B. , 2011, “ An Experimental Study of Group Idea Generation Techniques: Understanding the Roles of Idea Representation and Viewing Methods,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Oltețeanu, A.-M. , 2015, “ The Input, Coherence, Generativity (ICG) Factors. Towards a Model of Cognitive Informativity Measures for Productive Cognitive Systems,” Workshop Competition Creativity, Concept Invention, and General Intelligence, Institute of Cognitive Science, Osnabrück, Germany, Paper No. 5 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277570382_The_Input_Coherence_Generativity_ICG_Factors_Towards_a_Model_of_Cognitive_Informativity_Measures_for_Productive_Cognitive_Systems.
Viswanathan, V. K. , and Linsey, J. S. , 2013, “ Design Fixation and Its Mitigation: A Study on the Role of Expertise,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 135(5), p. 051008. [CrossRef]
Oltețeanu, A.-M. , and Falomir, Z. , 2016, “ Object Replacement and Object Composition in a Creative Cognitive System. Towards a Computational Solver of the Alternative Uses Test,” Cognitive Syst. Res., 39, pp. 15–32. [CrossRef]
Shah, J. J. , Vargas-Hernandez, N. , and Smith, S. M. , 2003, “ Metrics for Measuring Ideation Effectiveness,” Des. Stud., 24(2), pp. 111–113. [CrossRef]
Johnson, T. A. , Cheeley, A. , Caldwell, B. W. , and Green, M. , 2016, “Comparison and Extensions of Novelty Metrics for Problem-Solving Tasks,” ASME Paper No. DETC2016-60319.
Fu, K. , Yang, M. C. , and Wood, K. L. , 2016, “ Design Principles: Literature Review, Analysis, and Future Directions,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 138(10), p. 101103. [CrossRef]
Pang, M. , and Seepersad, C. , 2016, “Crowd-Sourcing the Evaluation of Design Concepts with Empathic Priming,” ASME Paper No. DETC2016-59417.
Fuge, M. , Stroud, J. , and Agogino, A. , 2013, “Automatically Inferring Metrics for Design Creativity,” ASME Paper No. DETC2013-12620.
Kruglanski, A. W. , and Fishman, S. , 2009, “ The Need for Cognitive Closure,” Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior, Guilford Press, New York, pp. 343–353.
Mayseless, O. , and Kruglanski, A. W. , 1987, “ What Makes You So Sure? Effects of Epistemic Motivations on Judgmental Confidence,” Organ. Behav. Human Decis. Processes, 39(2), pp. 162–183. [CrossRef]
Kudrowitz, B. , and Dippo, C. , 2013, “ When Does a Paper Clip Become a Sundial? Exploring the Progression of Novelty in the Alternative Uses Test,” J. Integr. Des. Process Sci., 17(4), pp. 3–18.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Reorientation in response for WaKo1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Change in viewpoint in response for WaKo2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

WaKo stimuli for pattern meanings test

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In