The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What Does it Mean to Design? A Qualitative Investigation of Design Professionals' Experiences
Open accessAbstract
Background: Design is essential to the engineering profession and plays a crucial role in preparation for future practice. Research investigating variations of how professional designers experience, give meaning to, and approach design can inform the ways we characterize, assess, and facilitate design learning. This may also have significant implications for preparing future engineering professionals to collaborate within and across disciplines. Purpose (Hypothesis): The goal of the study was to reveal and investigate critical differences in how designers from within and outside of engineering disciplines understand what it means to design, and how those understandings are evident in their approaches to and progression through design work. Design/Method: A qualitative research approach called phenomenography was used to investigate critical variations in how individuals experience and understand design. Twenty practicing designers were interviewed regarding their design experiences, how they approach design, and the ways they understand design. Conclusions: Six qualitatively distinct lenses on how individuals across disciplines experience and come to understand design emerged, comprising a phenomenographic “outcome space.” These include design as (1) evidencebased decision‐making, (2) organized translation, (3) personal synthesis, (4) intentional progression, (5) directed creative exploration, and (6) freedom. Theoretical implications include an understanding of how design skills and knowledge come together to form a design approach, while practical implications emphasize structuring variation‐based reflection, which can facilitate common ground as a result of recognizing differ “design lenses.”
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338 · cited 2×
“This perception of the task then influences thinking and engagement in that situation (Cross, 1995; Dorst, 2003; Goel & Pirolli, 1992; Neely, 2007; Rittel & Webber, 1973; Visser, 2006).”
BackgroundDevelopmental sequence in small groups.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0022100 · Cited by 5,778
Toward a design theory of problem solving
Jonassen, D. H. (2000) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/bf02300500 · Cited by 2,114
The engineering design process
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.30-6195 · Cited by 252
Design students' experience of engagement and creativity
Reid, A., & Solomonides, I. (2007) · Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education · doi:10.1386/adch.6.1.27_1 · Cited by 76
Cited by
Teaching Creativity in Engineering Courses
Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20048 · Cited by 281
Self-citationDesign and Design Thinking in STEM Education
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019) · Journal for STEM Education Research · doi:10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z · Cited by 258
Design at hackathons: new opportunities for design research
Flus, M., & Hurst, A. (2021) · Design Science · doi:10.1017/dsj.2021.1 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Daly, S. R., Adams, R. S., & Bodner, G. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Engineering Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-04
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 187-219
- ISSN
- 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-9830
- OpenAlex
- W2109697590
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 15.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Does it Mean to Design? A Qualitative Investigation of Design Professionals' Experiences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00048.x
- The paper
- Daly, S. R., Adams, R. S., & Bodner, G. M. (2012). What Does it Mean to Design? A Qualitative Investigation of Design Professionals' Experiences. Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00048.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.