Abstract
As engineering students gain experience and become experts in their domain, the structure and content of their knowledge changes. Two studies are presented that examine differences in knowledge representation among freshman and senior engineering students. The first study uses a recall paradigm, and the second uses Latent Semantic Analysis to analyze brief descriptions written by engineering students. Both studies find that the most prominent differences between these two groups of students are their representations of the function of electromechanical components and how these components interact. The findings from these studies highlight some ways in which the structure and content of mental representations of design knowledge differ with experience.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Atman, CJ, Chimka, JR, Bursic, KM and Nachtmann, HL: 1999, A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes, Design Studies 20: 131–152.
Ball, LJ, Evans, JST and Dennis, I: 1994, Cognitive processes in engineering design: A longitudinal study, Ergonomics 37(11): 1753–1786.
Ball, LJ, Evans, JSBT, Dennis, I and Ormerod, TC: 1997, Problem-solving strategies and expertise in engineering design, Thinking & Reasoning 3(4): 247–270.
Ball, LJ and Ormerod, TC: 1995, Structured and opportunistic processing in design - a critical discussion, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43(1): 131–151.
Chase, WG and Simon, HA: 1973, Perception in chess, Cognitive Psychology 4(1): 55–81.
Chi, MTH, Feltovich, PJ and Glaser, R: 1981, Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices, Cognitive Science 5(2): 121–152.
Deerwester, S, Dumais, ST, Furnas, GW and Landauer, TK: 1990, Indexing by latent semantic analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 41(6):391–407.
Egan, DE and Schwartz, BJ: 1979, Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings, Memory & Cognition 7(2): 149–158.
Gobet, F: 1998, Expert memory: A comparison of four theories, Cognition 66(2): 115–152.
Goel, V: 1995, Sketches of Thought, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Heiser, J and Tversky, B: 2002, Diagrams and descriptions in acquiring complex systems in WD Gray and CD Schunn (eds), 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 447–452.
Hill, A, Song, S, Dong, A and Agogino, A: 2001, Identifying shared understanding in design using document analysis, 13th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, Pittsburgh, PA, DETC2001/DTM-21713.
Kavakli, M and Gero, J: 2001, Sketching as mental imagery processing, Design Studies 22(4): 347–364.
Kavakli, M and Gero, J: 2002, The structure of concurrent cognitive actions: A case study on novice and expert designers, Design Studies 23(1): 25–40.
Landauer, TK and Dumais, ST: 1997, A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge, Psychological Review 104(2): 211–240.
Larkin, J, McDermott, J, Simon, DP and Simon, HA: 1980, Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems, Science 208(4450): 1335–1342.
Nisbett, RE, Fong, GT, Lehman, DR and Cheng, PW: 1987, Teaching reasoning, Science 238(4827): 625–631.
Quesada, JF, Kintsch, W and Gomez, E: 2002, A theory of complex problem solving using latent semantic analysis in WD Gray and CD Schunn (eds), 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 750–755.
Reitman, JS: 1976, Skilled perception in go: Deducing memory structures from inter-response times, Cognitive Psychology 8(3): 336–356.
Richman, HB, Staszewski, JJ and Simon, HA: 1995, Simulation of expert memory using EPAM IV, Psychological Review 102(2): 305–330.
Smith, RP and Leong, A: 1998, An observational study of design team process: A comparison of student and professional engineers, Journal of Mechanical Design 120(4): 636–642.
Stone, RB and Wood, KL: 2000, Development of a functional basis for design, Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4): 359–370.
Suwa, M, Purcell, T and Gero, J: 1998, Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions, Design Studies 19(4): 455–483.
Suwa, M and Tversky, B: 1997, What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis, Design Studies 18(4): 385–403.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this paper
Cite this paper
Moss, J., Kotovsky, K., Cagan, J. (2004). Cognitive Investigations into Knowledge Representation in Engineering Design. In: Gero, J.S. (eds) Design Computing and Cognition ’04. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2393-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2393-4_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6650-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2393-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive