Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Design Team Interaction Structure on Individual and Shared Mental Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Design Computing and Cognition '12

Abstract

The interaction structure of problem solving teams in design and other domains, and its effects on ideation outcomes is a well-explored topic in the study of team cognition in problem solving and design. Much less is known on how changes in team interaction structure influence the development of mental models over the course of work on a problem. This study aims to understand the relationship between team interaction structure and mental model development by measuring the similarity of individual mental models across time with respect to the individual and other group members. Three-member design teams from upper-level engineering design courses worked either independently or interactively on a mechanical design task for either the 1st half or the 2nd half of the design process. Participants were periodically interrupted for a written description of their mental models of the design process. Descriptions were analyzed with Latent Semantic Analysis to assess mental model convergence. Results show working together has a substantive impact on shared mental models of the design process, and team interaction was associated with more self-consistent mental models of individual team members across time. Working independently was also associated with mental models that were more similar to final design outcomes. Implications for team interaction structure, mental model development, and design fixation are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Craik KJW (1943) The nature of explanation. University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E, Converse S (1993) Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In: Castellan NJ Jr (ed) Individual and group decision making: current issues. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, pp 221–246

    Google Scholar 

  3. Paulus PB, Dzindolet M, Kohn NW (2011) Collaborative creativity—group creativity and team innovation. In: Mumford MD (ed) Handbook of organizational creativity. Elsevier, New York, pp 327–357

    Google Scholar 

  4. Linsey JS, Green MG, Murphy JT, Wood KJ, Markman AB (2005) “Collaborating to success”: an experimental study of group idea generation techniques. In: ASME 2005 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. Long Beach, CA

    Google Scholar 

  5. Osborn AF (1957/1993) Applied imagination, 3rd revised edn. Creative Education Foundation, Buffalo NY

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dong A, Hill AW, Agogino AM (2004) A document analysis method for characterizing design team performance. J Mech Des 126:378–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fiore SM, Rosen MA, Smith-Jentsch KA, Salas E, Letsky M, Warner N (2010) Toward an understanding of macrocognition in teams: predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts. Hum Factors 52:203–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA (1997) Methods, tools, and strategies for team training. In: Quinones M, Ehrenstein A (eds) Training for a rapidly changing workplace. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, pp 249–279

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Reiter-Palmon R, Herman AE, Yammarino FJ (2008) Creativity and cognitive processes: multi-level linkages between individual and team cognition. In: Mumford MD, Hunter ST, Bedell-Avers KE (eds) Multi-level issues in creativity and innovation, vol 7. Emerald, Bingley, pp 203–267

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reiter-Palmon R, Wigert B, de Vreede T (2012) Team creativity and innovation: the effect of group composition, social processes, and cognition. In: Mumford MD (ed) Handbook of organizational creativity. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annu Rev Psychol 55:623–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mumford MD, Feldman JM, Hein MB, Nagao DJ (2001) Tradeoffs between ideas and structure: individual versus group performance in creative problem solving. J Creative Behav 35:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Deerwester S, Dumais ST, Furnas GW, Landauer TK, Harshman R (1990) Indexing by latent semantic analysis. J Am Soc Inf Sci 41:391–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Landauer TK, Foltz PW, Laham D (1998) An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Process 25:259–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fu K, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2010) Design team convergence: the influence of example solution quality. J Mech Des 132:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mumford MD, Reiter-Palmon R, Redmond MR (1994) Problem construction and cognition: applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In: Runco MA (ed) Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Ablex Publishing, Westport CT, pp 3–39

    Google Scholar 

  17. Reiter-Palmon R, Mumford MD, Threlfall KV (1998) Solving everyday problems creatively: the role of problem construction and personality type. Creativity Res J 11:187–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bartlett FC (1932) A theory of remembering. In remembering: a study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 197–214

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gentner D, Stevens AL (1983) Mental models. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  20. Larson CE, LaFasto FMJ (1989) Teamwork: what must go right, what can go wrong. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  21. Badke-Schaub P, Neumann A, Lauche K, Mohammed S (2007) Mental models in design teams: a valid approach to performance in design collaboration? CoDesign 3(1):5–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dong A (2005) The latent semantic approach to studying design team communication. Des Stud 26:445–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Full Belly Project (2010) Full belly project—nut sheller. http://www.thefullbellyproject.org/Products/UniversalNutSheller.aspx

  24. Jansson DG, Smith SM (1991) Design fixation. Des Stud 12:3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Smith SM, Blankenship SE (1989) Incubation effects. Bull Psychon Soc 27:311–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith SM, Blankenship SE (1991) Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving. Am J Psychol 104:61–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Paulus PB, Brown VR (2002) Making group brainstorming more effective: recommendations from an associative memory perspective. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 11:208–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shah JJ, Vargas-Hernandez N, Summers JD, Kulkarni S (2001) Collaborative sketching (c-sketch)-an idea in generation technique for engineering design. J Creative Behav 35(3):168–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Otto KN, Wood KL (2001) Product design: techniques in reverse engineering and new product development. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  30. Linsey JS, Clauss EF, Kurtoglu T, Murphy JT, Wood KL, Markman AB (2011) An experimental study of group idea generation techniques: understanding the roles of idea representation and viewing methods. J Mech Design 133(3):031008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Cagan J, Kotovsky K (1997) Simulated annealing and the generation of the objective function: a model of learning during problem solving. Comput Intell 13:534–581

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Kotovsky K, Hayes JR, Simon HA (1985) Why are some problems hard? Evidence from Tower of Hanoi. Cogn Psychol 17:248–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Reber PJ, Kotovsky K (1997) Implicit learning in problem solving: the role of working memory capacity. J Exp Psychol Gen 126:178–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220:671–680

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Putman VL, Paulus PB (2009) Brainstorming, brainstorming rules and decision making. J Creative Behav 43:23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Brown VR, Paulus PB (1996) A simple dynamic model of social factors in group brainstorming. Small Group Res 27:91–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Brown VR, Tumeo M, Larey TS, Paulus PB (1998) Modeling cognitive interactions during group brainstorming. Small Group Res 29:495–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Diehl M, Stroebe W (1987) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: toward the solution of a riddle. J Pers Soc Psychol 53(3):497–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hernandez NV, Shah JJ, Smith SM (2010) Understanding design ideation mechanisms through multilevel aligned empirical studies. Des Stud 31(4):382–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rietzschel EF, Nijstad BA, Stroebe W (2006) Productivity is not enough: a comparison of interactive and nominal brainstorming groups on idea generation and selection. J Exp Soc Psychol 42:244–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Faure C (2004) Beyond brainstorming: effects of different group procedures on selection of ideas and satisfaction with the process. J Creative Behav 38:13–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kohn NW (2008) An examination of fixation in brainstorming. Texas A&M University, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  43. Baruah J, Paulus PB (2008) Effects of training on idea generation in groups. Small Group Res 39:523–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Laughlin PR (2011) Group problem solving. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  45. Latane B, Williams K, Harkins S (1979) Many hands make light the work: causes and consequences of social loafing. J Pers Soc Psychol 37(6):822–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Stasser G, Titus W (1985) Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. J Pers Soc Psychol 48(6):1467–1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Reiter-Palmon R, Robinson EJ (2009) Problem identification and construction: what do we know, what is the future? Psychol Aesthetics Creativity Arts 3(1):43–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Scott G, Leritz LE, Mumford MD (2004) The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review. Creativity Res J 16(4):361–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Strait MJ, Haynes JA, Foltz PW (2000) Applications of latent semantic analysis to lessons learned systems. In: Aha DW, Weber R (eds) Intelligent lessons learned systems: papers from the 2000 workshop. AAAI Press, Menlo Park

    Google Scholar 

  50. Matessa M (2000) Simulating adaptive communication. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  51. Pickering MJ, Garrod S (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behav Brain Sci 27:169–190

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Matthew Wood, Pinzhi Chen, Katherine Fu, Jonathan Cagan & Kenneth Kotovsky

Authors
  1. Matthew Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pinzhi Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jonathan Cagan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kenneth Kotovsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Cagan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study, Fairfax, Virginia, USA

    John S. Gero

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wood, M., Chen, P., Fu, K., Cagan, J., Kotovsky, K. (2014). The Role of Design Team Interaction Structure on Individual and Shared Mental Models. In: Gero, J. (eds) Design Computing and Cognition '12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9112-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9112-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9111-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9112-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation