The persistence of analogies in design decision-making

Previous theories of design decision-making have discussed how designers use analogical reasoning to quickly scope the solution space down to one viable solution. This initial analogy forms the template of a possible action plan that is then modified to suit the unique properties of that particular problem. This use of analogical reasoning allows designers to quickly engage with the problem and generate a workable solution. Our findings indicate that this initial analogy actually persists across all stages of decision-making, and does not play a role solely during the first stage of scoping. This analogical persistence leads to poorer design decisions. This thesis presents a series of studies that adopt a mixed method approach to investigating the influence of analogies on the decision-making of Interaction Designers. We employed qualitative methods such as the Critical Decision Method for Eliciting Knowledge (Klein, 1989), which aided in identifying analogical persistence as a problem that leads to poorer quality decisions. We also employed quantitative methods such as the Design Fixation paradigm (Jansson & Smith, 1991) to investigate how different types of analogies (self-generated & provided Priming Analogies) can influence the expression of analogical persistence. Finally in an attempt to mitigate the potential pitfalls of analogical persistence, this thesis attempts to control it using principles from Design Rationale (Lee & Lai, 1991) and Reflection (Schon, 1983). Rather than seeing a decrease in analogical persistence, our manipulation actually increased fixation. A follow-up study identified that designers tend to poorly appraise the weaknesses in the initial analogy, which may have led to the aforementioned unexpected result. These findings challenge the notion that greater understanding of the design space will lead to higher quality design decisions

A literature review of expert problem solving using analogy

We consider software project cost estimation from a problem solving perspective. Taking a cognitive psychological approach, we argue that the algorithmic basis for CBR tools is not representative of human problem solving and this mismatch could account for inconsistent results. We describe the fundamentals of problem solving, focusing on experts solving ill-defined problems. This is supplemented by a systematic literature review of empirical studies of expert problem solving of non-trivial problems. We identified twelve studies. These studies suggest that analogical reasoning plays an important role in problem solving, but that CBR tools do not model this in a biologically plausible way. For example, the ability to induce structure and therefore find deeper analogies is widely seen as the hallmark of an expert. However, CBR tools fail to provide support for this type of reasoning for prediction. We conclude this mismatch between experts’ cognitive processes and software tools contributes to the erratic performance of analogy-based prediction

The emergence of choice: Decision-making and strategic thinking through analogies

Consider the chess game: When faced with a complex scenario, how does understanding arise in one’s mind? How does one integrate disparate cues into a global, meaningful whole? how do humans avoid the combinatorial explosion? How are abstract ideas represented? The purpose of this paper is to propose a new computational model of human chess intuition and intelligence. We suggest that analogies and abstract roles are crucial to solving these landmark problems. We present a proof-of-concept model, in the form of a computational architecture, which may be able to account for many crucial aspects of human intuition, such as (i) concentration of attention to relevant aspects, (ii) \ud how humans may avoid the combinatorial explosion, (iii) perception of similarity at a strategic level, and (iv) a state of meaningful anticipation over how a global scenario \ud may evolve

Rationality and the Foundations of Positive Political Theory

In this paper, we discuss and debunk the four most common critiques of the rational choice research program (which we prefer to call Positive Political Theory) by explaining and advocating its foundations: the rationality assumption, component analysis (abstraction), strategic behavior, and theory building, in turn. We argue that the rationality assumption and component analysis, properly understood, can be seen to underlie all social science, despite the protestations of critics. We then discuss the two ways that PPT most clearly contributes to political science (i.e., what distinguishes it from other research programs), namely the introduction of strategic behavior (people do not just act; they interact) and PPT’s more careful attention to the theory-building step within the scientific method. We explain the roles of theory- building and of empirical “testing,” respectively, in scientific inquiry, and the criteria by which theories should and should not be judged

The Effectiveness of Case-Based Reasoning: An Application in Sales Promotions

This paper deals with Case-based Reasoning (CBR) as a support technology for sales promotion (SP) decisions. CBR-systems try to mimic analogical reasoning, a form of human reasoning that is likely to occur in weakly-structured problem solving, such as the design of sales promotions. In an empirical study, we find evidence that use of the CBR-system improves the quality of SP-campaign proposals. In terms of the creativity of the proposals, decision-makers who think highly divergent (i.e., who tend to generate many, and diverse ideas in response to a problem) benefit most from prolonged system usage. Creativity, in turn, is positively related to the (practical) usability of a proposal. These results suggest that the CBR-system is most effective when it is used as an idea-generation tool that reinforces the strength of divergent (creative) thinkers. A convergent thinking style, in which case the CBR-system has a compensating role, even has a negative impact on CBR-system usage. Increasing the decision-maker's personal belief in the usefulness of the system, e.g., by training or education, may help to alleviate this reluctance to use the CBR-system.marketing management support systems;sales promotions;case-based reasoning;weakly-structured decision making

Constitutional Analogies in the International Legal System

This Article explores issues at the frontier of international law and constitutional law. It considers five key structural and systemic challenges that the international legal system now faces: (1) decentralization and disaggregation; (2) normative and institutional hierarchies; (3) compliance and enforcement; (4) exit and escape; and (5) democracy and legitimacy. Each of these issues raises questions of governance, institutional design, and allocation of authority paralleling the questions that domestic legal systems have answered in constitutional terms. For each of these issues, I survey the international legal landscape and consider the salience of potential analogies to domestic constitutions, drawing upon and extending the writings of international legal scholars and international relations theorists. I also offer some preliminary thoughts about why some treaties and institutions, but not others, more readily lend themselves to analysis in constitutional terms. And I distinguish those legal and political issues that may generate useful insights for scholars studying the growing intersections of international and constitutional law from other areas that may be more resistant to constitutional analogies

References to past designs

Designing by adaptation is almost invariably a dominantambiguity feature of designing, and references to past designs are ubiquitous in design discourse. Object references serve as indices into designers' stocks of design concepts, in which memories for concrete embodiments and exemplars are tightly bound to solution principles. Thinking and talking by reference to past designs serves as a way to reduce the overwhelming complexity of complex design tasks by enabling designers to use parsimonious mental representations to which details can be added as needed. However object references can be ambiguous, and import more of the past design than is intended or may be desirable

Demand Forecasting: Evidence-based Methods

We looked at evidence from comparative empirical studies to identify methods that can be useful for predicting demand in various situations and to warn against methods that should not be used. In general, use structured methods and avoid intuition, unstructured meetings, focus groups, and data mining. In situations where there are sufficient data, use quantitative methods including extrapolation, quantitative analogies, rule-based forecasting, and causal methods. Otherwise, use methods that structure judgement including surveys of intentions and expectations, judgmental bootstrapping, structured analogies, and simulated interaction. Managers' domain knowledge should be incorporated into statistical forecasts. Methods for combining forecasts, including Delphi and prediction markets, improve accuracy. We provide guidelines for the effective use of forecasts, including such procedures as scenarios. Few organizations use many of the methods described in this paper. Thus, there are opportunities to improve efficiency by adopting these forecasting practices.Accuracy, expertise, forecasting, judgement, marketing.