The impact of analogies on creative concept generation: Lessons from an in vivo study in engineering design

Cognitive Science

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 126-155

  Chan, Joel ^a   Schunn, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

In vivo; Analogy; Creativity; Design cognition; Problem solving

Indexed keywords

CONCEPT FORMATION; CREATIVITY; HUMAN; PROBLEM SOLVING;

CONCEPT FORMATION; CREATIVITY; HUMANS; PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 84921539734     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12127     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Ball, L. J., & Christensen, B. T. (2009). Analogical reasoning and mental simulation in design: Two strategies linked to uncertainty resolution. Design Studies, 30(2), 169-186.
2. Ball, L. J., Evans, J. S., Dennis, I., & Ormerod, T. C. (1997). Problem-solving strategies and expertise in engineering design. Thinking and Reasoning, 3(4), 247-270.
3. Basadur, M., & Thompson, R. (1986). Usefulness of the ideation principle of extended effort in real world professional and managerial creative problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 20(1), 23-34.
4. Beals, R., Krantz, D. H., & Tversky, A. (1968). Foundations of multidimensional scaling. Psychological Review, 75(2), 127-142.
5. Beaty, R. E., & Silvia, P. J. (2012). Why do ideas get more creative across time? An executive interpretation of the serial order effect in divergent thinking tasks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 309-319.
6. Blanchette, I., & Dunbar, K. N. (2000). How analogies are generated: The roles of structural and superficial similarity. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), 108-124.
7. Blanchette, I., & Dunbar, K. N. (2001). Analogy use in naturalistic settings: The influence of audience, emotion, and goals. Memory & Cognition, 29(5), 730-735.
8. Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. New York: Routledge.
9. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. The American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-399.
10. Carlson, W. B., & Gorman, M. E. (1990). Understanding invention as a cognitive process: The case of Thomas Edison and early motion pictures, 1888-91. Social Studies of Science, 20(3), 387-430.
11. Chakrabarti, A. (2006). Defining and supporting design creativity. In Design 2006: The 9th International Design Conference. Dubrovnik, Croatia: The Design Society.
12. Chan, J., Fu, K., Schunn, C. D., Cagan, J., Wood, K. L., & Kotovsky, K. (2011). On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design: Ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples. Journal of Mechanical Design, 133, 081004.
13. Chiu, I., & Shu, H. (2012). Investigating effects of oppositely related semantic stimuli on design concept creativity. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(4), 271-296. doi:10.1080/09544828.2011.603298.
14. Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Spontaneous access and analogical incubation effects. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2), 207-220.
15. Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition, 35(1), 29-38.
16. Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2009a). "Putting blinkers on a blind man": Providing cognitive support for creative processes with environmental cues. In A. B. Markman & K. L. Wood (Eds.), Tools for innovation (pp. 48-74). New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2009b). The role and impact of mental simulation in design. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 327-344.
18. Clement, J. (1988). Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem solving. Cognitive Science, 12(4), 563-586.
19. Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428.
20. Dahl, D. W., & Moreau, P. (2002). The Influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 47-60.
21. Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J. E. (1986). The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis. Management Science, 32(11), 1422-1433.
22. Dunbar, K. N. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461-493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23. Dunbar, K. N. (2001). The analogical paradox: Why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. K. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind (pp. 313-334). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Dym, C. L. (1994). Engineering design: A synthesis of views. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1994). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19, 141-205.
26. French, M. (1988). Invention and evolution: Design in nature and engineering. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27. French, R. M. (2002). The computational modeling of analogy-making. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(5), 200-205.
28. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
29. Gentner, D. (2003). Why we're so smart. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 195-235). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R. W., Wolff, P., Markman, A. B., & Forbus, K. D. (1997). Analogy and creativity in the works of Johannes Kepler. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 403-459). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
31. Gentner, D., & Forbus, K. D. (2011). Computational models of analogy. WIREs Cognitive Science, 2, 266-276.
32. Gentner, D., & Landers, R. (1985). Analogical reminding: A good match is hard to find. In Proceedings of the 1985 International Conference on Cybernetics and Society. Tucson, AZ: IEEE.
33. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393-405.
34. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Forbus, K. D. (2009). Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science, 33(8), 1343-1382.
35. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.
36. Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K. D. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology, 25(4), 524-575.
37. Gero, J. S. (2000). Computational models of innovative and creative design processes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 64, 183-196.
38. Gero, J. S., & Kazakov, V. (1998). Using analogy to extend the behaviour state space in design. In J. S. Gero, & M. L. Maher (Eds.), Computational models of creative design IV (pp. 113-143). Sydney, Australia: Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney.
39. Gero, J. S., & Maher, M. L. (1991). Mutation and analogy to support creativity in computer-aided design. In proceedings of CAAD futures '91. Zurich, Switzerland: Elsevier.
40. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1-38.
41. Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1992). The structure of design problem spaces. Cognitive Science, 16, 395-429.
43. Goldschmidt, G. (2001). Visual analogy: A strategy for design reasoning and learning. In C. M. Eastman, W. M. McCracken, & W. C. Newstetter (Eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (pp. 199-220). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
44. Gonçalves, M., Cardoso, C., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2013). Inspiration peak: Exploring the semantic distance between design problem and textual inspirational stimuli. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 1(4), 214-232.
45. Gordon, W. J. J. (1961). Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper and Brothers.
46. Gorman, M. E. (1997). Mind in the world: Cognition and practice in the invention of the telephone. Social Studies of Science, 27(4), 583-624.
47. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454.
48. Hacco, E., & Shu, L. H. (2002). Biomimetic concept generation applied to design for remanufacture. 2002 ASME Design Engineering Technology Conference and Company and Information in Engineering Conference. Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
49. Hargadon, A. B. (2002). Brokering knowledge: Linking learning and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 41-85.
50. Hender, J. M., Dean, D. L., Rodgers, T. L., & Jay, F. F. (2002). An examination of the impact of stimuli type and GSS structure on creativity: Brainstorming versus non-brainstorming techniques in a GSS environment. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), 59-85.
51. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569-598.
52. Hey, J., Linsey, J., Agogino, A. M., & Wood, K. L. (2008). Analogies and metaphors in creative design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 12.
53. Heylighen, A., Deisz, P., & Verstijnen, I. M. (2007). Less is more original? Design Studies, 28(5), 499-512.
54. Hofstadter, D. R. (2001). Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. K. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind (pp. 499-538). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1996). Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56. Huh, Y., & Kim, M. S. (2012). Study on creativity of game graphics. Embedded and Multimedia Computing Technology and Service, 181, 339-346.
57. Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104(3), 427-466.
58. Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12(1), 3-11.
59. Jones, B. F. (2009). The burden of knowledge and the "death of the Renaissance man": Is innovation getting harder? Review of Economic Studies, 76(1), 283-317.
60. Keane, M. (1987). On retrieving analogues when solving problems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39(1), 29-41.
61. Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. Oxford, England: Macmillan.
62. Kornish, L. J., & Ulrich, K. T. (2014). The importance of the raw idea in innovation: Testing the sow's ear hypothesis. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(1), 14-26.
63. Kurtz, K. J., & Loewenstein, J. (2007). Converging on a new role for analogy in problem solving and retrieval: When two problems are better than one. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 334-341.
64. Linsey, J., Murphy, J., Laux, J., Markman, A. B., & Wood, K. L. (2009). Supporting innovation by promoting analogical reasoning. In A. B. Markman, & K. L. Wood (Eds.), Tools for innovation (pp. 85-103). New York: Oxford University Press.
65. Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (1999). Analogical encoding facilitates knowledge transfer in negotation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(4), 586-597.
66. Malaga, R. A. (2000). The effect of stimulus modes and associative distance in individual creativity support systems. Decision Support Systems, 29(2), 125-141.
67. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220-232.
68. Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., & Sager, C. E. (2003). Picking the right material: Cognitive processing skills and their role in creative thought. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative processes: Perspectives on creativity research (pp. 19-68). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
69. Nersessian, N. J. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (Vol. 15, pp. 3-45). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
70. Oppenheimer, R. (1956). Analogy in science. American Psychologist, 11(3), 127-135.
71. Paletz, S. B. F., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). A social-cognitive framework of multidisciplinary team innovation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(1), 73-95.
72. Parnes, S. J. (1961). Effects of extended effort in creative problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(3), 117-122.
73. Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind's best work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
74. Perkins, D. N. (1983). Novel remote analogies seldom contribute to discovery. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 17(4), 223-239.
75. Perkins, D. N. (1994). Creativity: Beyond the Darwinian paradigm. In M. A. Boden (Ed.), Dimensions of creativity (pp. 119-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
76. Perkins, D. N. (1997). Creativity's camel: The role of analogy in invention. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 523-538). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
77. Poze, T. (1983). Analogical connections: The essence of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 17(4), 240-258.
78. Raaijmakers, J. G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88(2), 93-134.
79. Rattermann, M. J., & Gentner, D. (1987). Analogy and similarity: Determinants of accessibility and inferential soundness. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
80. Reeves, L., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3), 381-400.
81. Rietzschel, E. F., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2009). What are we talking about, when we talk about creativity? Group creativity as a multifaceted, multistage phenomenon. In E. A. Mannix, M. A. Neale, & J. A. Goncalo (Eds.), Creativity in groups (Vol. 12, pp. 1-27). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
82. Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2007). Relative accessibility of domain knowledge and creativity: The effects of knowledge activation on the quantity and originality of generated ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 933-946.
83. Ross, B. H. (1987). This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13(4), 629-639.
84. Ruef, M. (2002). Strong ties, weak ties and islands: Structural and cultural predictors of organizational innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 427-449.
85. Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657-687.
86. Sawyer, K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York: Basic Books.
87. Schacter, D. L. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 54, 182-203.
88. Schunn, C. D., & Dunbar, K. N. (1996). Priming, analogy, and awareness in complex reasoning. Memory and Cognition, 24(3), 271-284.
89. Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., & Yaniv, I. (1995). Demystification of cognitive insight- Opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (Vol. 124, pp. 65-124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
90. Shah, J. J., Vargas-Hernandez, N., & Smith, S. M. (2003). Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Design Studies, 24(2), 111-134.
91. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
92. Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104(1), 66-89.
93. Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Schumacher, J. S. (1993). Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task. Memory & Cognition, 21(6), 837-845.
94. Sood, A., & Tellis, G. J. (2005). Technological evolution and radical innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69, 152-168.
95. Taylor, A., & Greve, H. R. (2006). Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 723-740.
96. Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. T. (2009). Innovation tournaments: Creating and selecting exceptional opportunities. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
97. Tortoriello, M., & Krackhardt, D. (2010). Activating cross-boundary knowledge: The role of Simmelian ties in the generation of innovations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 167-181.
98. Tseng, I., Moss, J., Cagan, J., & Kotovsky, K. (2008). The role of timing and analogical similarity in the stimulation of idea generation in design. Design Studies, 29(3), 203-221.
99. Ullman, D. (2002). The mechanical design process (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.
100. Vargas-Hernandez, N., Shah, J. J., & Smith, S. M. (2010). Understanding design ideation mechanisms through multilevel aligned empirical studies. Design Studies, 31(4), 382-410.
101. Walters, H. (2013). Since the TED Talk: Michael Pritchard on how he's helping end water poverty in Malaysia [Blog post]. Available at: http://blog.ted.com/2013/07/10/since-the-ted-talk-michael-pritchard-on-how-hes-helping-end-water-poverty-in-malaysia/. Accessed July 12, 2013.
102. Ward, T. B. (1998). Analogical distance and purpose in creative thought: Mental leaps versus mental hops. In K. J. Holyoak, D. Gentner, & B. Kokinov (Eds.), Advances in analogy research: Integration of theory and data from the cognitive, computational, and neural sciences (pp. 221-230). Sofia, Bulgaria: New Bulgarian University.
103. Weisberg, R. W. (2009). On "out-of-the-box" thinking in creativity. In A. Markman & K. Wood (Eds.), Tools for innovation (pp. 23-47). New York: Oxford University Press.
104. Wilson, J. O., Rosen, D., Nelson, B. A., & Yen, J. (2010). The effects of biological examples in idea generation. Design Studies, 31(2), 169-186.
105. Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.