Do Design Outcomes Get Influenced by Type of User Data? An Experimental Study with Primary and Secondary User Research Data

  • Abhishek DahiyaEmail author
  • Jyoti Kumar
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 876)


In User Centered Design (UCD), designers employ various user research methods to collect user data which help them in making design related decisions. While collecting primary user data, designers get a first-hand experience of users’ problems and their task environments. This paper reports an experimental study with 20 novice designers under influence of primary and secondary user data. Design solutions generated by novice designers were analyzed to observe design thinking. It was found that under the influence of primary user data, novice designers suffered more design fixations, had less divergent thinking but the concepts generated were more detailed with focus on users’ tasks. In light of the findings, this paper argues that novice designers get fixated with existing solutions used by the users while doing user research and find it difficult to think of novel solutions while ideating.


Ill-defined problem solving Design cognition User Centered Design User research 


  1. 1.
    Norman, D.: The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded. Hachette, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things/Emotional Design/Design of Future Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corry, M.D., Frick, T.W., Hansen, L.: User-centered design and usability testing of a web site: an illustrative case study. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 45(4), 65–76 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann (1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norman, D.A., Draper, S.W.: User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Preece, J.: Supporting user testing in human-computer interaction design. In: LNCS, pp. 256–267 (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chai, K.-H., Xiao, X.: Understanding design research: a bibliometric analysis of design studies (1996–2010). Des. Stud. 33(1), 24–43 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorst, K., Cross, N.: Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution. Des. Stud. 22(5), 425–437 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, E., Kim, K.: Cognitive styles in design problem solving: insights from network-based cognitive maps. Des. Stud. 40, 1–38 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tversky, B., Suwa, M.: Thinking with sketches. In: Tools for Innovation, pp. 75–84. Oxford University Press (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cardoso, C., Badke-Schaub, P.: Fixation or inspiration: creative problem solving in design. J. Creat. Behav. 45(2), 77–82 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sarkar, P., Chakrabarti, A.: Assessing design creativity, Design Studies (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith, T.F., Waterman, M.S.: Identification of common molecular subsequences. J. Mol. Biol. 147, 195–197 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaufman, J.C., Sternberg, R.J. (eds.): The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indian Institute of Technology DelhiNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations