Detecting mistakes in engineering models: the effects of experimental design

This paper presents the results of an experiment with human subjects investigating their ability to discover a mistake in a model used for engineering design. For the purpose of this study, a known mistake was intentionally placed into a model that was to be used by engineers in a design process. The treatment condition was the experimental design that the subjects were asked to use to explore the design alternatives available to them. The engineers in the study were asked to improve the performance of the engineering system and were not informed that there was a mistake intentionally placed in the model. Of the subjects who varied only one-factor-at-a-time, fourteen of the twenty-seven independently identified the mistake during debriefing after the design process. A much lower fraction, one out of twenty-seven engineers, independently identified the mistake during debriefing when they used a fractional factorial experimental design. Regression analysis shows that relevant domain knowledge improved the ability of subjects to discover mistakes in models, but experimental design had a larger effect than domain knowledge in this study. Analysis of video tapes provided additional confirmation as the likelihood of subjects to appear surprised by data from a model was significantly different across the treatment conditions. This experiment suggests that the complexity of factor changes during the design process is a major consideration influencing the ability of engineers to critically assess models.Charles Stark Draper LaboratorySUTD-MIT International Design Centr

Understanding how adults approach technological challenges: A sequential mixed methods research

People from all backgrounds engage with technology in their everyday lives. There is, however, a gap in the public\u27s understanding of technology and limited research on how engineers and non-engineers approach technological challenges. Prior studies have focused on the public\u27s understanding of technology but limited research has been conducted on how people deal with technological challenges as part of their everyday lives. Studying how individuals with non-STEM backgrounds engage with technology will contribute a more comprehensive understanding of strategies for closing the technological literacy gap. Taking into account that technology developments rapidly occur, lifelong learning skills are another critical dimension of technological competency. ^ The purpose of this study is to identify how adults with STEM (specifically engineering) and non-STEM backgrounds with varying levels of lifelong learning approach technological challenges in their everyday lives. ^ A sequential mixed methods design using nested, purposeful sampling was performed. The quantitative strand included cluster analysis for outlier identification. The qualitative strand included thematic analysis. Four groups of participants were formed: Engineers with lower (LLE) and higher (HLE) levels of lifelong learning and non-STEM participants with lower (LLnE) and higher (HLnE) levels of lifelong learning. Twelve outliers —three in each group— were selected for the qualitative strand. Two semi-structured interviews were conducted on participants\u27 past and recent experiences with technology and challenges they faced during such interactions. ^ Three dimensions of approaching technology (attitudes, behaviors, and conceptions) emerged from the analysis. Those with broader conceptions of technology were more active users of technology and were emotionally neutral towards the challenge. Conversely, those who had narrower conceptions of technology were passive users of technology and had strong positive and negative emotions towards the challenge. The analyses resulted in five different approaches to technological challenges: disengagement, scaffolding, transitioning, emotional engagement, and ownership. In particular, background shaped conceptions about technology, engagement, and attitudes towards the challenge. This inclusive understanding informs future research and practice about new strategies for improving technology education for all citizens, aligned with the 21st century skills framework

Engineering anti-individualism : a case study in social epistemology

This dissertation is a contribution to two fields of study: applied social epistemology and the philosophy of technology. That is, it is a philosophical study, based on empirical fieldwork research, of social and technical knowledge. Social knowledge here is defined as knowledge acquired through the interactions between epistemic agents and social institutions. Technical knowledge is here defined as knowledge about technical artefacts (including how to design, produce, and operate them). I argue that the two must be considered collectively both in the sense that they are best considered in the light of collectivist approaches to knowledge and in the sense that they must be considered together as part of the same analysis. An analysis solely of the interactions between human epistemic agents operating within social institutions does not give adequate credit to the technological artefacts that help to produce knowledge; an analysis of technical knowledge which does not include an analysis of how that technical knowledge is generated within a rich and complex social network would be similarly incomplete. I argue that it is often inappropriate to separate analyses of technical knowledge from social knowledge and that although not all social knowledge is technical knowledge, all technical knowledge is, by definition, social. Further, the influence of technology on epistemic cultures is so pervasive that it also forms or 'envelops' what we consider to be an epistemic agent

Dynamics of Early Project Collaboration

Early project collaboration involves the resolution of misunderstandings among project participants. Misunderstandings can be considered a natural emergent feature in Early Project Collaboration, which only become problematic if they are not revealed and resolved, leading to wrong assumptions and false expectations among project participants. At early project interactions, misunderstandings tend to involve individuals’ different interpretations of what collaboration means. Diverse interpretations of collaboration become manifested within different artefacts that project participants design and select to use in the activity. When these diverse understandings are revealed and exposed in time, they can lead to opportunities to explore and expand different ways to perceive the situation, as well as to conceive different design alternatives. However, little is known about the nature of collaborative interactions related to the resolution of misunderstandings at early project stage. Current interpretations of these collaborative interactions seem to be limited by a positivist and reductionist notion of knowledge, which have traditionally focused on individual models of cognition, separating mind and body. A case study approach was adopted to address this gap in the literature and propose a new interpretation of early project collaboration. The findings from the case studies suggested that the resolution of misunderstandings requires that participants perceive and embrace the dialectical and situated nature of collaborative interaction towards mutual intelligibility, involving breakdowns and the use of metaphors. The study also revealed that early project interactions involve the socio-construction of key constructs of collaboration objectivated in terms of perceptions of interdependency and performance, and conceptions of resource and changing actions. Thus, project participants need to work upon misunderstandings emerging from different interpretations of these key constructs of collaboration that become embodied into diverse artefacts, assembles, events and approaches in the activity. As a result, this thesis proposes an alternative to current models of early project collaboration, based on a group-level framework that provides the means to interpret the dialectical and situated nature of early project collaboration. It is contended that the proposed theoretical framework provides a better interpretation of collaborative interactions because it allows the mapping of individuals’ interactions to socially construct the project activity. It is suggested that this framework can potentially be used by project participants as a mapping tool, aligned with a pragmatic perspective, and supporting collective reflective interaction to socially construct collaboration