How Should We Measure Creativity in Engineering Design? A Comparison Between Social Science and Engineering Approaches
How Should We Measure Creativity in Engineering Design? A Comparison Between Social Science and Engineering Approaches
复制标题
DOI：
10.1115/1.4049061
复制
发表时间：
2020-11
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Scarlett R. Miller;Samuel T. Hunter;Elizabeth Starkey;S. Ramachandran;Faez Ahmed;M. Fuge
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Scarlett R. Miller;Samuel T. Hunter;Elizabeth Starkey;S. Ramachandran;Faez Ahmed;M. Fuge
长期以来，设计研究人员一直试图了解支持创意发展的机制。然而，设计界面临的关键挑战之一是如何有效地衡量创造力的模糊结构。社会科学界和工程界采用了两种截然不同的方法来解决这个问题，这两种方法都在工程设计研究中得到了应用。本文的目的是使用近1000个工程设计思想的设计评级来比较和对比这两种方法。本研究的结果表明，虽然这两种方法提供了相似的想法质量评级，但在统计上，这两种方法对想法新颖性评级之间存在显著的负相关。此外，研究结果还显示，全球创造力评级的可靠性和一致性存在差异。本研究的结果指导了在工程设计研究和证据中的想法评级的部署。
Design researchers have long sought to understand the mechanisms that support creative idea development. However, one of the key challenges faced by the design community is how to effectively measure the nebulous construct of creativity. The social science and engineering communities have adopted two vastly different approaches to solving this problem, both of which have been deployed throughout engineering design research. The goal of this paper was to compare and contrast these two approaches using design ratings of nearly 1000 engineering design ideas. The results of this study identify that while these two methods provide similar ratings of idea quality, there was a statistically significant negative relationship between these methods for ratings of idea novelty. In addition, the results show discrepancies in the reliability and consistency of global ratings of creativity. The results of this study guide the deployment of idea ratings in engineering design research and evidence.