CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 330Design Education and PracticeCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceArtistic and Creative Research

Fixation and creativity in concept development: The attitudes and practices of expert designers

Open access
Crilly, Nathan·2015·Design Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.destud.2015.01.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Interviews were conducted with thirteen professional designers to understand their attitudes towards fixation and the practices they adopt to address it. Fixation was thought to be encouraged and discouraged by a wide range of factors related to the project, the client, the design team, the organisational culture and the design activities employed. The experiences that designers accumulate during their professional lives were associated with fixation in different ways. The experience of prior design failures was thought to encourage fixation whilst the experience of varied solutions was thought to discourage fixation. Recognising fixation episodes and reflecting on them was described as the means by which designers could guard against such episodes in the future and thus be more creative.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.destud.2015.01.002

Cites

150 of 150 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Empowering designers to recognise and reflect upon fixating episodes might be beneficial in developing a less fixating co-ideation workflow with AI.

    “Crilly [17] suggests that empowering designers to recognise and reflect upon fixating episodes might be beneficial in developing a less fixating co-ideation workflow with AI.”

    From The Effects of Generative AI on Design Fixation and Divergent Thinking (2024) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Conclusion (section 4.2) says that reflecting on prior fixation episodes can help designers challenge fixation, and section 4.1 proposes training to support that reflection. The paper does not specifically address co-ideation workflows with AI; that application is the citing authors’ extension of Crilly’s suggestion. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Badke-Schaub, P. (2013). A pleading for a holistic research approach of creativity and innovation in design [in perspectives on design creativity and innovation research (Editorial board of IJDCI)]. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 1(1), 1e42.
  2. Breakwell, G. M. (2006). Interviewing methods. In G. M. Breakwell, S. Hammond, C. Fife-Schaw, & J. A. Smith (Eds.), Research methods in psy- chology (3rd ed). (pp. 232e253). London, UK: SAGE.
  3. Defazio, J. (2008). Designing with precedent: A cross-disciplinary inquiry into the design process. (PhD Dissertation). Indiana University.
  4. Linsey, J. (2013). Advancing the scholarship of design creativity research [in per- spectives on design creativity and innovation research (Editorial board of IJDCI)]. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 1(1), 1e42.
  5. Shekerjian, D. (1991). Uncommon genius: How great ideas are born. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
  6. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  7. Smith, S. M. (2013). Design creativity: a theoretical and empirical science [in per- spectives on design creativity and innovation research (Editorial board of IJDCI)]. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 1(1), 1e42.
  8. Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, B. T., & Ball, L. J. (2013). Collaborative problemeso- lution co-evolution in creative design. Design Studies, 34(5), 515e542.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Crilly, N.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Crilly, Nathan
ORCID
Crilly, Nathan
Venue
Design Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-05
Volume
38
Pages
54-91
ISSN
0142-694X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.destud.2015.01.002
OpenAlex
W2050894834
Cited by
330
References
150
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 1
FWCI
20.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Design Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/K008196/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Artistic and Creative Research
Keywords
fixation, creativity, concept development, expert designers, design process, design failure, design experience, organizational culture, design teams, reflective practice, design practice

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