Research Methodology for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the Creative Self-formation Process

Research Methodology for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the Creative Self-formation Process Yukari Nagai 1, Toshiharu Taura 2 and Koutaro Sano 1 1 Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Japan 2 Kobe University, Japan Abstract. Since the external observation of creative design thinking fails to grasp the designer s inner self, this study aims to propose a method for internal observation which can be elicited during creative design thinking by extending reflections and poietiques. This method comprises three stages: (1) the creative design practice, (2) writing of reports designer s practice by the designer and a third person (art researcher), and (3) writing of another report by the designer after examining both the reports from the second stage. We applied this method to a space-designing project. The three reports were analysed, both quantitatively and qualitatively, and many observations that were not included in the previous two reports were identified in the third report. After these analyses, we confirmed that the sense of self was formed in the third stage and that our method of internal observation was feasible. Keywords: design creativity, self-formation, reflection, poietiques, internal observation 1 Introduction Existing studies have shown that investigating one s inner self is particularly difficult. This difficulty emanates from the logical paradox: When he observed himself, he was changed (Hass, 2008). Moreover, it is difficult to observe creative design thinking from an inner perspective when people are deeply engaged in their. The reason behind this is that people who are engrossed in their are assumed to have entered a mental state known as flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Furthermore, the external observation of creative design thinking may fail to grasp the inner self because it is stimulated by intrinsic motivation (Amabile, 1985; Loewenstein, 1994) and formed by inner dynamics (Varela, et al., 1997). It should also be noted that a designer s thought space is formulated from inside (Nagai and Taura, 2006). Thus, observing creative design thinking using either internal or external forms of observation may be considered as an impossible task. To surmount this barrier, we have attempted to formulate a methodology based principle that the method of inner observation is feasible when the occurrence of the self-forming (the of forming the self) is confirmed during observation. Although the observed self may be different from the self (the self when it is not being observed), our aim is to facilitate an observed self. For this purpose, we will be examining techniques known as poietiques and reflections, both of which can complement other currently used methods for inner observation. The method of poietiques was first proposed by Rene Passeron (1989). It is based concept of poietics, which introduced by the poet Paul Valery (1960). Valery claimed that it is more important to study the of the creation of the poem than the final poem itself. He asserted that learning from the spirit of creation that inspires the poet (often recorded in a cahier or notebook ) is more important than the traditional methodology of a critical analysis of a poem. Passeron used Valery s methodology to create the theoretical challenge of poietiques as an approach for studying the creative es of art as experienced by artists themselves. However, Passeron s poietiques focused only on examining and discovering artists creative practices; it did not attempt to structure the details of their techniques. Reflections is a popular technique for accessing selfconsciousness, which was first proposed by Schön (1987). We have considered this technique here because we regard it as a relevant approach to reinvestigate the self. Moreover, it has been confirmed as a useful method for examining our understanding of the design. By using this method, we presume that differences in inner reflections depend differences in perspectives created by the variability of the objective self. Schön found that people who had achieved a high level of creativity often reflected objectively ir own creative es. Several examples of the effectiveness of objective reflection have been reported in cognitive studies and education,

216 Y. Nagai, T. Taura and K. Sano because objective reflections help people notice their mistakes or fixations from the meta-level viewpoints of their activities (Valkenburg and Dorst, 1998; Oxman, 2002). Thus, we can observe that using an objective reflection of the self when conducting creative activities can be beneficial. However, in order to enhance the of self-formation, identifying the nature of creative self-formation is necessary. It is also anticipated that subjective reflections may play a role in this. Therefore, we propose a challenging method of observing creative self-formation which can be implemented after a careful consideration of its feasibility and limitations. The key factor that reveals the effectiveness of inner observation in creative selfformation is the occurrence of certain novel motifs (self) during design thinking. The characteristics of this method are mentioned as follows. Firstly, this method is based on relevant reports. Secondly, it involves both an outer perspective and an inner perspective. Thirdly, the method identifies the occurrence of novel motifs (observed self) through the integration of both perspectives. 2 Aims The aim of the study is to propose a methodology based idea that the method of inner observation is feasible when the occurrence of the self-forming is confirmed during the observing. For this purpose, we have structured our methodology by incorporating and extending the techniques of reflections and poietiques. The main issue for discussion in this study is how designers form a self through the internal observation of their own design es. 3 Frame of the Method of Internal Observation Firstly, we must discuss the conditions necessary for using our method. The most important condition for the success of internal observation is that it should not break the of creative design thinking. By break, we mean creating a situation in which the self has been changed by external factors. In order to avoid this, the es of design practice and selfformation need to be separated. Therefore, we need to set up the self-formation after the designer has completed the design practice. Most designers have a long-standing habit of maintaining a diary in the form of daily sketches, notes, and photographs. Some designers even have a habit of maintaining portfolios to trace the evolution of their creative regularly. We have taken advantage of such habits in this study. Secondly, we must consider the various methods of representing human thoughts. The think-aloud method is a feasible way of collecting thoughts through verbalization (Taura et al., 2002). However, this method is not sufficient for self-formation, because it may disrupt the concentration of the designer who is deeply engaged in the creative practice. Moreover, we believe that the think-aloud method can disturb the habitual pattern of the designer. Therefore, it is preferable to use the descriptive method, which comprises writing reports on design thinking. This is usually done after the designer completes the. Another advantage of report writing is that it is helpful for careful investigation when the report is read at a later date. Visual information such as sketches and photographs are useful sources for designers to remind themselves of what their thoughts were at a particular time. Thirdly, we must consider how difficult it is to observe the inner self from an inner perspective when people are deeply engaged in their, as described above. Therefore, a third person writes another report about the design practice. Designers found this more distanced perspective to be useful, probably because it made it easier for them to remind themselves of the elements of the design practice. It is certainly necessary to retain the quality of an outer perspective. For an external observer with an outer perspective, who is not familiar with the of creative design thinking, it is impossible to focus on essential issues regarding how it s. Therefore, we must consider someone who is the most capable of accessing such a perspective. For example, we need to consider the role of art researchers. The art of most of the great artists has been mainly studied after their deaths (Clark, 1939). Art researchers are specialists who have been educated in the interpretation of recorded sketches and arts. We focus on art researchers with special skills and consider that they have the ability of developing an outer perspective of a high level. On the basis of the above three factors, we propose an original methodology for the internal observation of design thinking, wherein the creative self-formation is distinguished from the design practice. This method comprises three stages: (1) the creative design practice, (2) writing of reports design practice by the designer and a third person (art researcher), and (3) writing of another report by the designer after examining both the second-stage reports. The first stage is the creative design practice. Designers concentrate on performing their own practice. Normally, in the case of a space design, the period of design practice is six months or longer. Records of the are accumulated in the

Research Methodology for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the Creative Self-formation Process 217 designer s habitual manner through sketches, notes, diaries, and portfolios. The second stage involves initial report writing. After completing the design practice, the designer begins to write a report by observing the recorded sketches, notes, etc. The descriptive items of this report will have been decided in advance. This is because both reports will be analysed in the third stage. The nature of these reports derives from previous knowledge about art research, which indicates that motifs, expression, and techniques are the three main items for reporting art. These items are strongly related to the essential elements of creative thinking. Other elements such as materials and presentations are subsidiary items. Additionally, an external observer writes a report by exploring the same sources (recorded sketches, notes, etc.) with the designer. The external observer should be a specialist, for example, an art researcher, who can appropriately interpret the records. In order to avoid overt and unnecessary influence on a report in the next stage (the third stage), the external observer does not meet with the designer. Although the selfformation of a designer may occur during the second stage, we expect the next stage to include a stronger self-formation. The third stage comprises the designer s creative self-formation. At this point, the designer reads the two reports written in the second stage. One report is written by the designer, and the other, by the external observer. The designer compares them in detail and carefully analyses every sentence of each report to identify the differences. The designer then examines the contents of the reports and re-writes sentences, adds new sentences, or deletes unnecessary sentences, in order to elucidate the second report such that it provides a clearer analysis of his or her own design practice. Figure 1 shows the outline of the methodology for the internal observation of the designer. 4 Detailed Procedure of Internal Observation We developed a detailed procedure for the practical experiment basis of the above frame. 4.1 Organization of the Practical Experiment We conducted a practical experiment on actual design, using the three stages mentioned above. This was done to ensure that not only the practice but also the observation of the creative self-formation is conducted. The practical experiment was performed as follows: Two experimenters planned how to conduct the practical experiment. A designer designed a (space designing) and dwelled in the creative self-formation. An external observer reported designer s thinking from an outer perspective. To determine a suitable designer for this practical experiment, we listed certain conditions, which comprised the possibilities of long-time activity and independence, and rich intrinsic motivations. We selected a young freelance designer aiming to participate in a contest of space designing. Student designers could not be selected in this case because it Fig. 1. The methodology for internal observation

218 Y. Nagai, T. Taura and K. Sano was difficult to separate them from their educational programmes. As for professional designers, they cannot always concentrate on a single design for a long time, because they are usually occupied with parallel activities. We also found an art researcher with excellent skills in the investigation of records of design thinking, and invited this researcher to be the external observer of our practical experiment. 4.2 Procedure of the Practical Experiment We conducted the practical experiment sequentially. As shown in Table 1, the contents of the report were determined. The names of the reports in this study were assigned as follows: Report S: the designer s first report Report K: the external observer s report Report F: the designer s second report Table 1. Contents of the reports Items related to es (Labelled P) P-1 Content time sequence of the P-2 Content technique of the P-3 Content motif (theme) of the P-4 Content expression of the Items related to (Labelled W) W-1 Content field of the W-2 Content technique of the W-3 Content materials of the W-4 Content expressed motif of the W-5 Content expression of the W-6 Content exhibition (display) of the The procedure for creating Report F in the third stage is described in detail below. Step 1: After reading both reports, the designer divides Reports S and K into sentences and labels them. Each sentence of Report S is labelled s, and each sentence of Report K is labelled k. Step 2: The designer re-reads each s - or k - labelled sentence and classifies them according to their relevant categories (Table 1). After the classification of all sentences, the experimenters check them for consistency. Step 3: The designer then compares each s - or k -labelled sentence in detail and analyses every sentence in each report carefully, in order to identify the similarities and differences. If an s -labelled sentence expresses the same meaning as two k - labelled sentences, the decision is based s - labelled sentence. Step 4: After a detailed comparison of the sentences, the designer re-writes the sentences, adds new sentences, or deletes the unnecessary sentences, and arranges them in a time-based frame. On the basis of this, the designer then writes the second report on his own design practice (Report F). Figure 3 shows the contents of Report F. The designer assigns the label f on each sentence of Report F. Report F represents each sentence ID as referring to the original report. The sentences which are not used for Report F become d -labelled sentences, which were originally neither s - nor k -labelled, and are now deleted (D-1 and D-2 in Figure 3). Fig. 2. Example of labelling of sentences Fig. 3. Contents of Report F Report F comprises F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, and F-5, as explained below. F-1: sentences which were originally labelled as both s and k. F-2: sentences which were originally only labelled as s. F-3: sentences which were originally only labelled as k.

Research Methodology for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the Creative Self-formation Process 219 F-4: sentences which were neither labelled as s nor k but were newly written by the designer. F-5: sentences which originally had a meaning that differed from s - and k -labelled sentences and had been rewritten in order to be added to Report F by the designer. It is important to mention that the structure of Report F was better than that of the previous report. An example of Report F is shown below. Report F: A designer wanted to express the texture of clay and he thought the clay s most important texture was not obvious, but he thought it was instability. 5 Results of the Experiment We applied this method to a practical experiment a space-designing project. A male designer, who had eight years of experience and was entering a spacedesigning contest, participated in the practical experiment. For the role of the external observer, we recruited a female art researcher with an impressive career background. The total duration of the experiment was 24 months: 17 months for the first stage (design practice), 3 months for the second stage (report writing), and 4 months for the third stage (analysis). In the first stage, the designer provided many sketches and photographs (Figure 4). He noted rough ideas about the and his conceptions as they developed. Fortunately, he had already the habit of recording the date on each sketch. Further, he regularly maintained a diary. Thus, all the relevant information was stored as a record of the entire design practice. The record was arranged along the timeline. He also maintained portfolios which provided detailed information about the. In the second stage, the designer and the external observer wrote each report separately, after looking at the record prepared in the first stage of the experiment. Finally, in the third stage, the designer analysed the reports and wrote the second report. Before we present the results of the quantitative and qualitative analyses, we need to explain the styles of each report. We compared the descriptive styles of Reports S and K. Report S, prepared by the designer, was fragmentary and more like a memorandum of his experiences. Report K, prepared by the external observer (the art researcher) was written in a more logical and well-composed style. Examples of sentences from the reports are given below. Report S: Texture we call the end of organization like that texture, which all structure has. Report K: He tested the various kinds of textures, and he seemed to explore any images through the experience, without setting an obvious goal image. 6 Analysis and Discussion 6.1 Quantitative Analysis We now compare Reports S and K. Both were created in the second stage after looking at the same record. The number of sentences in Report S was 115, while that in Report K was 146. Therefore, we can infer that the external observer wrote more sentences because she captured the through a detailed interpretation (Table 2). On the other hand, the designer did not note his own design practice clearly. This is supported by the sentences which were written in only one report: 68 by the designer and 99 by the external observer. Table 2. Comparison of Reports S and K Category included in S and K (F-1) not included in S or K, but were added to F (F-5) included only in S (F-2) included only in S, but not described in F (D-1) included only in K (F-3) included only in K, but not described in F (D-2) Number of sentences in each report Report S Report K 39 39 8 8 Total 115 146 We consider Report F to be a result of the creative self-formation. Therefore, we analysed Report F to identify how the self-forming es had occurred. For this purpose, we analysed Report F using 51 17 93 6

220 Y. Nagai, T. Taura and K. Sano the reasons and original sentences in Report S or Report K. Table 3 shows the result of the relationships between Report F and Report S or Report K. In Report F, 51 sentences were originally written by the designer, and 93 sentences, by the external observer. Table 3. Analysis of Report F (the second report by the designer) from the original sentences in Reports S and K Category Original sentences Number of sentences in F F-1 From S and K 39 F-2 From S only 51 F-3 From K only 93 F-4 New sentences that were not originally described in S or K F-5 From S and K implicitly 8 Total 265 74 This implies that the designer did not recognize some of the important points that he had made during the design practice, but he was still being supported by the external observer s perspective. Moreover, Report F contained 74 new sentences that were not originally described. We analysed these 74 sentences. Table 4 shows the result of the classification of the contents of the report. This shows that the frequency of the occurrence of motifs was clearly high. The emergence of the 74 sentences, which were newly written in Report F, suggests that the cause is the integration of the inner perspective of the designer and the outer perspective of the external observer. This implies that the designer probably did not reflect on these aspects sufficiently when he subsequently wrote the first report based on his inner perspective. However, when he read the report, which had been written from the outer perspective of the external observer, he reflected more deeply. Furthermore, the result that many of the 74 sentences were related to the motif suggests that the designer had developed a new self-formulation when he recognized the difference between the perspectives: the inner and the outer. Fig. 4. Example of the sketches Fig. 5. The (space designing) of the designer

Research Methodology for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the Creative Self-formation Process 221 Table 4. Content of Report F Item F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 Total Process P-1 Content on the time sequence of the 16 1 20 10 1 48 P-2 Content on the technique 10 14 9 9 1 43 of the P-3 Content on the motif (theme) of the 1 15 18 15 2 51 P-4 Content on the expression of the W-1 Content field of the W-2 Content technique of the W-3 Content materials of the W-4 Content expressed motif of the W-5 Content expression of the W-6 Content exhibition (display) of the 0 0 7 9 2 18 Work 3 1 5 3 1 13 1 1 9 1 0 12 5 7 10 12 0 34 1 1 6 3 0 11 2 3 2 8 1 16 0 8 7 4 0 19 Total 39 51 93 74 8 265 6.2 Qualitative Analysis We assume that the designer s self-formation occurs in the third stage. Moreover, we assume that the designer s observed self is different from the self shown when he does not observe himself. However, we consider that the observed self has potentially always existed within himself, as this self continuously exists later on. To confirm this, we asked the same designer to read the 74 sentences again, two years after the experiment. He evaluated the contents of the sentences qualitatively. Finally, he selected the most important sentences basis of the development of his design. These sentences are stated below. (1) The designer understood the relationship between natural things and artificial things in connection with the relationships between the gregarious plants and gregarious houses in the city. (2) The designer, however, wanted to represent the feeling of what he got from the cool wind when he was resting his exhausted body, after his hard of digging and cutting of roots. He provided the following reasons for selecting them. (1) I have recognized the relationship between natural things and artificial things from the words in the sentence of Report S. Those words were nature and a map of the city. After I had read the two reports, I found the missing parts of Report S. I reflected on myself again. Then, I awakened my perspective relationships between dualities: nature and artificial or gregarious plants and gregarious houses. This sentence represents the main motif of my. It has been my theme and my vision of the world. (2) I found that the part of the sentence the feeling he got from the cool wind represents the point at which I understood the expression. I was sensitive to the sound of wind, smells, resonances, and so on. I was driven by my emotions. My emotion was stimulated by such senses. The trigger for my inspiration was my senses. I recognized the core part of my motivation from this sentence. We finally found that the motif of the newly written sentence in the second report of the designer was present in the third stage. In light of this, we recognized the effectiveness of adopting the outer perspective of the external observer and integrating it with the designer s inner perspective for internal observation. Another finding of this study is related to the role of writing in the self-formation. The roles of language in design and in other activities have been highlighted by a number of studies (Suwa, 2009; Eckert and Stacey, 2000; Dong, 2006). The proposed method is expected to develop the methodology further through discussions of the role of language and reflections on creative thinking not only in the field of design but also in other disciplines. However, it was necessary to accumulate trials and open discussions. The methods should be simplified in the accumulation of more trials. To formulate suitable procedures, we

222 Y. Nagai, T. Taura and K. Sano conducted a long-term experiment with very detailed examinations. More rational procedures can be established by future studies basis of our findings. 7 Conclusion We developed the methodology for the internal observation of design thinking through the creative self-formation, wherein a designer s inner perspectives are integrated with an outer perspective basis of the idea that the method of inner observation is feasible when the occurrence of the selfforming is confirmed during the observing. We identified the occurrence of the motif which stimulates the designer s intrinsic motivation through a practical experiment. Therefore, we conclude that the self has been observed in this experiment. References Amabile TM, (1985) Motivation and creativity: effects of motivational orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48(2):393 399 Clark K, (1939) Leonardo da Vinci: An Account of his Development as an Artist. Cambridge University Press Csikszentmihalyi M, (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row Hass L, (2008) Merleau-Ponty s Philosophy. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press Loewenstein G, (1994) The psychology of curiosity: a review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin 116(1):75 98 Maturana HR, Varela FJ, (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers Nagai Y, Taura T, (2010) Formal description of conceptual synthesizing for creative design. Design Computing and Cognition DCC 06, edited by John Gero, 443 460, Dordrecht: Springer Oxman R, (2002) The thinking eye: visual re-cognition in design emergence. Design Studies 23(2):135 164 Schön DA, (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc Suwa M, (2009) Meta-cognition as a tool for storytelling and questioning. What is What s the Design? Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design 16-2(62):21 26 Taura T, Yoshimi T, Ikai T, (2002) Study of gazing points in design situation a proposal and practice of an analysis method based explanation of design activities. Design Studies 23(2):165 185 Valkenburg R, Dorst K, (1998) The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies 19(3):249 271 Valery P, (1960) The Collected Works of Paul Valéry. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E, (1997) The Embodied Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press Passeron R, (1989) Pour une philosophie de la création. In: Recherches Poétiques. Vol. I, Paris: Klincksieck Eckert C, Stacey M, (2000) Sources of inspiration: a language of design. Design Studies 21(5):523 538 Dong A, (2009) The Language of Design: Theory and Computation. London: Springer-Verlag