Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:09:38.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EXPLORING HOW EXPERT BEHAVIOURAL DESIGNERS IDEATE IN THE BEHAVIOURAL DESIGN SPACE

Part of: Engineering Design Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

C. K. E. B. B. Nielsen ,
J. Daalhuizen  and
P. Cash
C. K. E. B. B. Nielsen*
Affiliation:
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
J. Daalhuizen
Affiliation:
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
P. Cash
Affiliation:
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
*
*ckeni@dtu.dk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Behavioural design is a critical means to address challenges surrounding human behaviour. However, practitioners and researcher face difficulties in synthesising relevant perspectives from across fields as behavioural challenges are complex and multi-dimensional. Taking a theory-building approach, this study explore how expert behavioural designers navigate in this complex design space by examining the creative outcome of their current ideation practice. The findings reveal that the designers favour ‘holding’ out of the four identified ideation patterns: holding, shifting, pairing, and mixing.

Keywords

behavioural designdesign creativitydesign practicecase study
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 2541 - 2550
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Andreasen, M.M., Hansen, C.T. and Cash, P. (2015), Conceptual Design: Interpretations, Mindset and Models, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19839-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akrich, M. (1992), “The De-Scription of Technical Objects”, In: Bijker, W.E. and Laws, J. (Eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986), “Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives”, Developmental psychology, Vol. 22 No. 6, p. 723. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989, April), “The developing ecology of human development: Paradigm lost or paradigm regained”, Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, MO.Google Scholar
Cash, P.J., Hartlev, C.G. and Durazo, C.B. (2017), “Behavioural design: A process for integrating behaviour change and design”, Design Studies, Vol. 48, pp. 96–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cash, P. and Štorga, M. (2015), “Multifaceted assessment of ideation: using networks to link ideation and design activity”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 26 No. 10-12, pp. 391–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2015.1070813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaiken, S. and Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999), Dual-process theories in social psychology, Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Cialdini, R.B. and Goldstein, N.J. (2004), “Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 591–621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cialdini, R.B. (2007), Influence: The psychology of persuasion, Collins, New York.Google Scholar
Crilly, N. and Cardoso, C. (2017), “Where next for research on fixation, inspiration and creativity in design?”, Design Studies, Vol. 50, pp. 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2017.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogg, B.J. (2009a, April), Creating persuasive technologies: an eight-step design process. Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology, 44. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1541948.1542005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogg, B.J. (2009b, April), A behavior model for persuasive design. Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology, 40. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1541948.1541999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogg, B.J. (2019), Tiny habits: the small changes that changes everything, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (2014), Linkography: Unfolding the design process, The MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9455.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J.P. (1956), “The structure of intellect”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 53 No. 4, p. 267. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040755CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansson, D.G. and Smith, S.M. (1991), “Design fixation”, Design Studies, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694x(91)90003-fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jauk, E., Benedek, M. and Neubauer, A.C. (2012), “Tackling creativity at its roots: Evidence for different patterns of EEG alpha activity related to convergent and divergent modes of task processing”, International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.02.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking, fast and slow, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Karbach, J. and Schubert, T. (2013), “Training-induced cognitive and neural plasticity”, Front Hum Neurosci, Vol. 7, p. 48. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00048CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohn, N.W. and Smith, S.M. (2011), “Collaborative fixation: Effects of others’ ideas on brainstorming”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1992), “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts”, In: Bijker, W.E. and Laws, J. (Eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Michie, S., Van Stralen, M.M. and West, R. (2011), “The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions”, Implementation Science, Vol. 6 No. 1, p. 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miltenberger, R.G. (2011), Behavior modification: Principles and procedures, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Mumford, M.D., Connelly, S. and Gaddis, B. (2003), “How creative leaders think: Experimental findings and cases”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 4-5, pp. 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(03)00045-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, C.K.E.B.B., Cash, P. and Daalhuizen, J. (2018), “The behavioural design solution space: examining the distribution of ideas generated by expert behavioural designers”, DS92: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International Design Conference, Design Society, pp. 1981–1990. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niedderer, K., Clune, S. and Ludden, G. (Eds.). (2017), Design for Behaviour Change: Theories and practices.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prochaska, J.O. (1979), Systems of psychotherapy: A transtheoretical analysis, Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315576602Google Scholar
Rantanen, K., Conley, D.W. and Domb, E.R. (2017), Simplified TRIZ: New Problem Solving Applications for Technical and Business Professionals, Productivity Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b22111-13Google Scholar
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), When Rewards Compete with Nature: The Undermining. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance, 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012619070-0/50024-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schell, J. (2014), The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses, AK Peters/CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, C. and Thaler, R. (2008), Nudge. The politics of libertarian paternalism, New Haven. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.405940Google Scholar
Tromp, N., Hekkert, P. and Verbeek, P.P. (2011), “Design for socially responsible behavior: a classification of influence based on intended user experience”, Design Issues, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T.B., Smith, S.M. and Finke, R.A. (1999), “Creative cognition”, In: Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511807916.012Google Scholar
Wendel, S. (2013), Designing for behavior change: Applying psychology and behavioral economics, O'Reilly Media, Inc.Google Scholar
Yin, R.K. (2013), Case study research: Design and methods, Sage publications.Google Scholar