Translated Titles

Impact of case-based visual stimuli on conceptual design creativity



Key Words

none ; Visual stimuli ; conceptual design ; creativity



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication


Academic Degree Category




Content Language


Chinese Abstract


English Abstract

Creativity is the correlation and reconstruction of the experiences we have in our mind. The conceptual stage is the first stage where creativity is seen, it is the design stage where any idea is welcomed. Visual stimuli have been concluded to have an effect on the quality of a design solution. Therefore, this study aims to find the influence of two different types of visual stimuli namely; random visual stimuli and complete solution stimuli. Random images are any visuals that one sees daily. Complete solution is a complete product that is already a possible solution for an answer. Two experiments are conducted in this study, the subject selection aims to find subjects within the same range of creativity. This is achieved through the Williams Creativity Assessment test. The second experiment, concept creativity experiment investigates the concept designs produced by subjects under the influence of the above mentioned two visual stimuli. The criteria being scored are originality, practicality, interactivity and overall completeness. Significant differences were found in practicality and overall completeness, where the group influenced by complete solution performed better. No significant differences were found in the criteria of originality and interactivity. In conclusion, different visual stimuli stimulate the designer in different aspects. Random visual stimuli stimulated the forms of the product and provided a vertical development of the concept. Complete solution stimuli stimulated functional aspects of the design and provided a horizontal development of the concept.

Topic Category 規劃與設計學院 > 工業設計學系
工程學 > 工程學總論
  1. Eckert, C. and Stacey, M., 2000. Sources of inspiration: a language of design
  2. Design Studies Vol. 21 No. 5, p 523-538.
  3. Gabora, L., 2002. Cognitive mechanisms underlying the creative process. In (T.
  4. Creativity and Cognition , October 13-16, Loughborough University, UK, p 126-133.
  5. spatial reasoning in design, p 275-280.
  6. Koestler, A., 1964. The Act of Creation London: Hutchinson & Co.Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., 1980. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago
  7. Press, p 103-114.
  8. Individual Creativity Support Systems. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual
  9. McCoy, M. J. and Evans, G. W., .2002. The potential role of the physical environment
  10. collective creativity in design using visual images. In Proceedings of the 3rd
  11. Torrance, E. P., 1966. The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: norms-technical
  12. Warr, A. and O'Neill, E., 2005. Understanding design as a social creative process. In
  13. Warr, A. and O'Neill, E., 2006. The effect of group composition on divergent thinking
  14. Casakin, H. and Goldschmidt, G., 2000. Reasoning by visual analogy in design
  15. problem-solving: the role of guidance Journal of Planning and Design: Environment
  16. & Planning B Vol. 27 p 105-119.
  17. Finke, R. A., 1990. Creative imagery: discoveries and inventions in visualization
  18. Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ, p 204–244.
  19. Hewett and T. Kavanagh, Eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on
  20. Goldschmidt, G. and Smolkov, G., 2006. Variances in the impact of visual stimuli on
  21. design problem solving performance, Design Studies, Volume 27, Issue 5, p 549-569.
  22. Johnson, J. Sharp, H. and Petre, M., 1999. The use of sources of inspiration in early
  23. knitwear design: a computational model in J S Gero and B Tversky (eds) Visual and
  24. Lawson, B., 1980. How Designers Think. The Architectural Press, London, p 6.
  25. Malaga, R. A., 1999. The Effect of Stimulus Modes and Associative Distance in
  26. Hawaii international Conference on System Sciences-Volume 7 - Volume 7 (January
  27. 05 - 08, 1999). HICSS. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 7006.
  28. in fostering creativity Creativity Research Journal Vol 14 No 3&4, p 409-426.
  29. Nakakoji, K. Yamamoto, Y. and Ohira, M., 1999. A framework that supports
  30. Conference on Creativity & Cognition (Loughborough, United Kingdom, October 11
  31. - 13, 1999). C&C '99. ACM, New York, NY, p 166-173.
  32. Rhodes, M., 1961. An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, p 305-310.
  33. Saffer, D., 2006. Designing for Interaction, New Riders. p 4.
  34. manual. Presonnel Press, Princeton, N.J.Wallas, G. The Art of Thought., 1926. Harcourt, Brace & World, New York.
  35. Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Creativity &Amp; Cognition (London, United
  36. Kingdom, April 12 - 15, 2005). C&C '05. ACM Press, New York, NY, p 118-127.
  37. in an interaction design activity. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on
  38. Designing interactive Systems (University Park, PA, USA, June 26 - 28, 2006). DIS
  39. '06. ACM Press, New York, NY, p 122-131.
  40. Williams, F. E., 1993. Creativity Assessment Packet (CAP): Examiner’s manual.
  41. http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=mental%20synthesis
  42. http://www.tokyo-fashion.net/content/big5/Index.shtml
  43. http://www.notcot.org