Insight as Problem-Solving in Architectural Designs: A Case Study

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran.

2 Department of Architecture, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran. Faculty member of Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute, Department of Building, Research Institute of Cultural and Historical Buildings and Textures, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Historical Contexts Research Center, Department of Architecture, Lahijan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lahijan, Iran.

Abstract

Problem statement: In the agreed-upon model of Wallas (1926), The Art of Thought, the third stage is illumination, which has remained a problem for design thinking. Without the ability to understand problem solving and illumination now, design thinking cannot be understood. Due to the instantaneity of this illumination and the nature of general illumination, it is impossible to provide a proper understanding of it.
Many different methods have been developed to negate the designer’s direct confrontation with the problem and refer it to previous instructions. This means that a direct understanding of the design situation is not possible. However, there is evidence that suggests a direct understanding of the design problem. The questions of the present study are as follows: Is it possible to have a direct understanding of the design situation? If so, what is the mechanism? What does it have to do with productive thinking? What effect could it have on architectural education?
Research objective: The present study aims to examine the immediate and direct understanding of the design problem through practical observations of architectural design.
Research method: The present study is qualitative. To collect the data, the thinking aloud technique was used. This technique has long been used in the study of thinking. For this purpose, in-depth interviews were carried out with architectural design students. The data were analyzed using a modified version of Goldschmidt’s (1991) method. In addition, library sources were used.
Conclusion: The present study introduces a three-stage model of insight. The designer first notices the inherent gaps in the design problem. These gaps have signs of structural connections within them, and understanding these connections leads to the restructuration of the design problem. These stages can be linked in a sequential cycle. The insight model shows that the designer can directly understand the above steps.

Keywords


Alexander, C. (1984). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Ashraf Ganjouei, M. A., Saghafi, M. R. & Iranmanesh, M. (2019). The Influence of Visual Stimulus Diversity on Students’ Creativity at Architectural Design Studio 1. Iranian Architecture & Urbanism (JIAU), 10(1), 127-140.
Bastani, M. & Mahmoodi, A. S. M. (2019). Learning Styles and Analogical Thinking Method during the Design Process of Architecture. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 24(1), 71-84.
Badke-Schaub, P., Goldschmidt, G. & Meiger, M. (2010). How Does Cognitive Conflict in Design Teams Support the Development of Creative Ideas? Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 19(2), 119-133.
Bjorklund, T. A. (2013). Initial mental representations of design problems: Differences between experts and novices. Design Studies, 34(2), 135-160.
Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design Studies, 1(1), 36-44.
Daneshjoo, K., Hosseini Alamdari, A. & Moeinipour, M. (2019). Evaluating the success of architecture education in Iran in promoting creativity and creative imagination of students, Case Study: Malayer University. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ), 14(1), 189-197.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. A Bradford Book, London: The MIT Press.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Protocol Analysis and Expert Thought: Concurrent Verbalizations of Thinking during Experts’ Performance on Representative Tasks. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge University Press.
Farrel, R., & Hooker, C. (2013). Design, Science and Wicked Problems. Design Studies, (34)6, 681-705.
Fitzek, H. (2005). Gestalpsychologie als Grundlage einer Methodologie der Qualitatven Forschung-adargestellt am Gütekriterium Gegenständliche Relevanz. Journal für Psychologie, 13(4), 372-402.
Gero, J. & Tang, H. (2001). The differences between retrospective and concurrent protocols in revealing the process-oriented aspects of the design process. Design Studies, (22), 283-295.
Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The Dialectics of Sketching. Creativity Research, 4(2), 123-143.
Goldschmidt, G. (1992). Criteria for design evaluation: A process oriented paradigm. In Y. E. Kalay, (Ed.), Evaluating and predicting design performance. NY: John Wiley & Sons. 
Goldschmidt, G. (1994). On visual design thinking: the vis kids of architecture. Design Studies, (15), 158-174.
Goldschmidt, G. (1997). Capturing indeterminism: representation in the design problem space. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123-143.
Goldschmidt, G. (1999). Expertise and the use of visual analogy: implications for design education. Design Studies, (22), 283-295.
Goldschmidt, G. (2000). Reasoning by visual analogy in design problem-solving: the role of guidance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, (27), 105-119.
Goudini, J. (2020). Proposing a Holistic Definition of the Architecture Design Process. Bagh-e Nazar, 17(91), 29-40.
Greeno, J. G. (1977). Process of understanding in problem solving. Cognitive Theory, (2), 43-83.
Hillier, B., Musgrove, J. & O’Sullivan, P. (1972). Knowledge and design. Environmental design: research and practice, (2), 1-3.
Hosseini, E. S., Falamaki, M. M. & Hojat, I. (2019). The Role of Creative Thinking and Learning Styles in the Education of Architectural Design. Architectural Thought, 3(5), 125-140.
Kaplan, C. A. & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, (22), 374–419.
Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394.
Kolodner, J. L. & Wills, L. M. (1996). Powers of observation in creative design. Design Studies, (17), 385-416.
Lawson, B. (2005). How Designers Think (H. Nadimi, Trans.). Tehran: Shahid Behesthti unversity.
Leighton, J. (2009). Two Types of Think Aloud Interviews for Educational Measurement: Protocol and Verbal Analysis. Centre for Research in Applied Measurement and Evaluation (CRAME), University of Alberta,  Paper presented for symposium How to Build a Cognitive Model for Educational Assessments at the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), April 14-16, San Diego, CA.
Mahmoodi A. S. (2005). Design Thinking the Interactive Model of Thinking and Design. HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA, (20), 27-36.
Metzger, W. (2006). Laws of seeing (L. Spillmann, Trans.). London: MIT Press.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M. Keane & K. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the Psychology of Thinking. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
Öllinger M. & Goel, V. (2010). Problem Solving. In B. Glatzeder, V. Goel & A. Müller (Eds.), Towards a Theory of Thinking. Berlin: Springer.
Ollinger, M. & Knoblich, G. (2009). Psychological Research on Insight Problem Solving. In H. Atmanspacher & H. Primas (Eds.), Recasting Reality. Berlin: Springer.
Oxman, R. (1997). Design by re-representation: a model of visual reasoning in design. Design Studies, 18(4), 329-347.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner How Professional Think in Action. Aldershot and Brookfield USA and Singapore and Sydney: Ashgate Arena.
Schön, D. A. (1984). Problems, Frame and Perspectives on Designing. Design Studies, 5(3), 132-136.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating The Reflective Practitioner. San Fransisco, London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schön, D. A. & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design studies, 13(2), 135-156.
Sharif, H. (2012). Critical Thinking and Evaluation of Design Concept. Soffeh, 21(2), 53-64.
Sharif, H. (2014). Student-teacher interaction in architectural design studio: teacher’s critical thinking & students’ creative thinking. Engineering Education, 16(64), 23-38.
Simon, H. A. (1978). Information-processing theory of human problem solving. In W. K. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes. V. 5. Human information processing. Oxford, UK: Erlbaum.
Soloman, B. A. & Felder, R. M. (2005). Index of learning styles questionnaire. Retrieved may 14, 2010, from http://www. engr. ncsu. edu/learningstyles/ilsweb. Html
Tabibzadeh, K. S., Parva, M. (2021). Moghayeseye tafakkore vagara va hamgara dar farayande tarrahi memari ba takid bar amuzeshe memari [Comparison of divergent and convergent thinking in the architectural design process with emphasis on architectural education]. Memari Shenasi, 3 (18), 1-8.
Talebi, M., Moosavi M. S. & Poshneh K. (2021). An Analysis of the Effectiveness of Creativity Teaching Techniques on Architectural Design with emphasis on the process of idea-finding and idea-generation. Innovation and Creativity in Human Sciences, 11(2), 71-100.
Tayyah, S., Mehdizadeh Seraj, F. M. & Mahmoodi Zarandi, M. M. (2021). Developing a Nature-Inspired Model of Creativity in Architectural Design for Novice Learners. Bagh-e Nazar, 18(100), 91-108.
Visser, W. (2006). The cognitive artifacts of design. Mahwah. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive Thinking. NewYork: Harper and Row.
Wertheimer, M. (1996). A Contemporary Perspective on the Psychology of Productive Thinking. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association. Toronto, Ontario, Canada.