Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
- The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction and Perspectives
- Part II Overview of Approaches to the Study of Expertise: Brief Historical Accounts of Theories and Methods
- Part III Methods for Studying the Structure of Expertise
- Part IV Methods for Studying the Acquisition and Maintenance of Expertise
- Part V.I Domains of Expertise: Professions
- 19 Expertise in Medicine and Surgery
- 20 Expertise and Transportation
- 21 Expertise in Professional Design
- 22 Toward Deliberate Practice in the Development of Entrepreneurial Expertise: The Anatomy of the Effectual Ask
- 23 Professional Writing Expertise
- 24 Expertise and Expert Performance in Teaching
- 25 Expert Professional Judgments and “Naturalistic Decision Making”
- 26 Skilled Decision Theory: From Intelligence to Numeracy and Expertise
- 27 What Makes an Expert Team? A Decade of Research
- Part V.II Domains of Expertise: Arts, Sports, Games, and Other Skills
- Part VI Generalizable Mechanisms Mediating Types of Expertise
- Part VII General Issues and Theoretical Frameworks
- Index of Subjects
- References
21 - Expertise in Professional Design
from Part V.I - Domains of Expertise: Professions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 May 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
- The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction and Perspectives
- Part II Overview of Approaches to the Study of Expertise: Brief Historical Accounts of Theories and Methods
- Part III Methods for Studying the Structure of Expertise
- Part IV Methods for Studying the Acquisition and Maintenance of Expertise
- Part V.I Domains of Expertise: Professions
- 19 Expertise in Medicine and Surgery
- 20 Expertise and Transportation
- 21 Expertise in Professional Design
- 22 Toward Deliberate Practice in the Development of Entrepreneurial Expertise: The Anatomy of the Effectual Ask
- 23 Professional Writing Expertise
- 24 Expertise and Expert Performance in Teaching
- 25 Expert Professional Judgments and “Naturalistic Decision Making”
- 26 Skilled Decision Theory: From Intelligence to Numeracy and Expertise
- 27 What Makes an Expert Team? A Decade of Research
- Part V.II Domains of Expertise: Arts, Sports, Games, and Other Skills
- Part VI Generalizable Mechanisms Mediating Types of Expertise
- Part VII General Issues and Theoretical Frameworks
- Index of Subjects
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , pp. 372 - 388Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Adams, R., Turns, J., & Atman, C. (2003). Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design Studies, 24, 275–294.Google Scholar
Ahmed, S., Wallace, K., & Blessing, L. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design, 14, 1–11.Google Scholar
Akin, Ö., & Lin, C. (1996). Design protocol data and novel design decisions. In Cross, N., Christiaans, H., and Dorst, K. (eds.), Analysing design activity (pp. 35–63). Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Alexiou, K., Zamenopoulos, T., Johnson, J. H., & Gilbert, S. J. (2009). Exploring the neurological basis of design cognition using brain imaging: Some preliminary results. Design Studies, 30, 623–647.Google Scholar
Ball, L., & Ormerod, T. (1995). Structured and opportunistic processing in design: A critical discussion. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 43, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boden, M. (1990). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar
Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. (1992). Cognitive models in industrial design engineering: A protocol study. In Taylor, D. L. and Stauffer, L. A. (eds.), Design theory and methodology (pp. 131–137). New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.Google Scholar
Crilly, N. (2015). Fixation and creativity in concept development: The attitudes and practices of expert designers. Design Studies, 38, 54–91.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (1997). Creativity in design: Analyzing and modeling the creative leap. Leonardo, 30, 311–317.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In Eastman, C. M., McCracken, W. M., and Newstetter, W. C. (eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (pp. 79–103). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N., & Clayburn Cross, A. (1998). Expertise in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, 10, 141–149.Google Scholar
Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design Studies, 1, 36–44.Google Scholar
Davies, R., & Talbot, R. (1987). Experiencing ideas: Identity, insight and the imago. Design Studies, 8, 17–25.Google Scholar
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22, 425–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (2005). Expertise in real world contexts. Organization Studies, 26, 779–792.Google Scholar
Eastman, C. M. (1970). On the analysis of intuitive design processes. In Moore, G. T. (ed.), Emerging methods in environmental design and planning (pp. 21–37). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, S. J., Zamenopoulos, T., Alexiou, K., & Johnson, J. H. (2009). Involvement of right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in ill-structured design cognition: An fMRI study. Brain Research, 1312, 79–88.Google Scholar
Goel, V., & Grafman, J. (2000). Role of the right prefrontal cortex in ill-structured planning. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 17, 415–436.Google Scholar
Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1992). The structure of design problem spaces. Cognitive Science, 16, 395–429.Google Scholar
Guindon, R. (1990). Designing the design process: Exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Human–Computer Interaction, 5, 305–344.Google Scholar
Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, G. (1999). Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L., & Wills, L. M. (1996). Powers of observation in creative design. Design Studies, 17, 385–416.Google Scholar
Lawson, B. (1979). Cognitive strategies in architectural design. Ergonomics, 22, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, B. (2004). Schemata, gambits and precedent: Some factors in design expertise. Design Studies, 25, 443–457.Google Scholar
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford: Architectural Press/Elsevier.Google Scholar
Lloyd, P., & Scott, P. (1994). Discovering the design problem. Design Studies, 15, 125–140.Google Scholar
Lloyd, P., & Scott, P. (1995). Difference in similarity: Interpreting the architectural design process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 22, 383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, P., & Snelders, D. (2003). What was Philippe Starck thinking of? Design Studies, 24, 237–253.Google Scholar
Maher, M. L. (1994). Creative design using a genetic algorithm. Computing in Civil Engineering, 2, 2014–2021.Google Scholar
Oxman, R. (1990). Prior knowledge in design: A dynamic knowledge-based model of design and creativity. Design Studies, 11, 17–28.Google Scholar
Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. (1992). Effects of examples on the results of design activity. Knowledge Based Systems, 5, 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. (1996). Design and other types of fixation. Design Studies, 17, 363–383.Google Scholar
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Schön, D., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies, 13, 135–156.Google Scholar
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2001). Composition and construction in experts’ and novices’ weaving design. Design Studies, 22, 47–66.Google Scholar
Sio, U. N., Kotovsky, K., & Cagan, J. (2015). Fixation or inspiration: A meta-analytic review of the role of examples on design processes. Design Studies, 39, 70–99.Google Scholar
Suwa, M., Gero, J., & Purcell, T. (2000). Unexpected discoveries and S-invention of design requirements: Important vehicles for a design process. Design Studies, 21, 539–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suwa, M., Purcell, T., & Gero, J. (1998). Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions. Design Studies, 19, 455–483.Google Scholar
Ullman, D. G., Dietterich, T. G., & Stauffer, L. A. (1988). A model of the mechanical design process based on empirical data. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, 2, 33–52.Google Scholar
Ullman, D. G., Wood, S., & Craig, D. (1990). The importance of drawing in the mechanical design process. Computers and Graphics, 14, 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, W. (1990). More or less following a plan during design: Opportunistic deviations in specification. International Journal of Man–Machine Studies, 33, 247–278.Google Scholar
Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, S., & Ball, L. J. (2013). Collaborative problem-solution co-evolution in creative design. Design Studies, 34, 515–542.Google Scholar
- 50
- Cited by