Dear Colleagues,
I have come to believe that an emphasis on correlation and abductive thought are characteristic of design thinking, while causal reasoning is used primarily to validate and implement what is expressed. Designers are very good at identifying and adapting similarities often through analogies and metaphors, editing out information that doesn’t suit their objectives.
I don’t know if either correlation or abductive reasoning have been used as systematic design or research methods.
Does anyone know of a well documented example of a systematic use of correlation or abduction in design practice or research?
I have recently published a paper "Re-cognizing* Components in A Theory of Design Thinking” (www.independent.academia.edu/charlesburnette <http://www.independent.academia.edu/charlesburnette>) that describes how correlation was used heuristically to determine the seven modes of thought in the theory. Once identified, the modes were correlated with profiles of different subjects to demonstrate critical thinking, content analysis, generation of new content, and instrumental application.
I believe correlation can be an important tool in design research and practice. But, I don’t believe it has yet been recognized as such.
I hope I’m wrong.
Thanks for your help or critique.
Chuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|