Collaborative design decision-making as social process

References

• Akin, Omer, and Chengtah Lin. 1996. “Design Protocol Data and Novel Design Decisions.” In Analysing Design Activity, edited by N. Cross, H. Christiaans, and K. Dorst, 35–63. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Angouri, Jo, and Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini. 2011. “‘So What Problems Bother You and You are not Speeding up Your Work?’ Problem Solving Talk at Work.” Discourse & Communication 5 (3): 209–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atman, Cynthia J., Monica E. Cardella, Jennifer Turns, and Robin Adams. 2005. “Comparing Freshman and Senior Engineering Design Processes: An In-depth Follow-up Study.” Design Studies 26 (4): 325–357. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2004.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atman, Cynthia J., and Jennifer Turns. 2001. “Studying Engineering Design Learning: Four Verbal Protocol Studies.” In Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, edited by C. Eastman, W. Newstetter, and M. McCracken, 37–60. Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, Rebecca. 2007. “Formulations and the Facilitation of Common Agreement in Talk.” Text & Talk – An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies 27 (3): 273–296.
   Google Scholar
• Bartu, Hülya. 2003. “Decisions and Decision Making in the Istanbul Exploratory Practice Experience.” Language Teaching Research 7 (2): 181–200.
   Google Scholar
• Boden, Deirdre. 1994. The Business of Talk: Organizations in Action. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Colin, and David Elms. 2015. “Engineering Decisions: Information, Knowledge and Understanding.” Structural Safety 52: 66–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucciarelli, Louis. 1994. Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bucciarelli, Louis, and Sarah Kuhn. 1997. “Engineering Education and Engineering Practice: Improving the Fit.” In Between Craft and Science: Technical Work in U.S. Settings, edited by S. R. Barley and J. E. Orr, 210–229. New York: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Button, Graham, and Wes Sharrock. 2000. “Design by Problem-Solving.” In Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Information System Design, edited by P. Luff, J. Hindmarsh, and C. Heath, 46–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, Adam, Walter Eppich, Vincent Grant, Jonathan Sherbino, Benjamin Zendejas, and David Cook. 2014. “Debriefing for Technology-enhanced Simulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” Medical Education 48: 657–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, Michael, James March, and Johan Olsen. 1972. “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice.” Administrative Science Quarterly 17 (1): 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crismond, David, and Robin Adams. 2012. “The Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix.” Journal of Engineering Education 101 (4): 738–797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, Nigel, and Anita Cross. 1996. “Observations of Teamwork and Social Processes in Design.” In Analysing Design Activity, edited by N. Cross, H. Christiaans, and K. Dorst, 291–317. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, Shanna, Robin Adams, and George Bodner. 2012. “What Does It Mean to Design? Qualitative Investigation of Design Professionals’ Experiences.” Journal of Engineering Education 101 (2): 187–219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dym, Clive, Alice Agogino, Ozgur Eris, Daniel Frey, and Larry Leifer. 2005. “Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning.” Journal of Engineering Education 94 (1): 103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, Harold, and Harvey Sacks. 1986. “On Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” In Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, edited by H. Garfinkel, 157–189. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Glasspool, David, and John Fox. 2005. “Knowledge, Argument, and Meta-cognition in Routine Decision-making.” In The Routines of Decision Making, edited by T. Betsch and S. Haberstroh, 343–358. New York: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gómez Puente S. M., Michael van Eijck, and Wim Jochems. 2011. “Towards Characterising Design-based Learning in Engineering Education: A Review of the Literature.” European Journal of Engineering Education 36 (2): 137–149.
   Google Scholar
• Goncher, Andrea, and Aditya Johri. 2015. “Contextual Constraining of Student Design Practices.” Journal of Engineering Education 104 (3): 252–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halvorsen, Kristin, and Srikant Sarangi. 2015. “Team Decision-making in Workplace Meetings: The Interplay of Activity Roles and Discourse Roles.” Journal of Pragmatics 76: 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, David, and Lesley Griffiths. 1997. “‘Ruling in’ and ‘Ruling out’: Two Approaches to the Micro-rationing of Health Care.” Social Science & Medicine 44 (5): 589–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huisman, Marjan. 2001. “Decision-making in Meetings as Talk-in-interaction.” International Studies of Management and Organization 31 (3): 69–90.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, David. 2011. Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-solving Learning Environments. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, David. 2012. “Designing for Decision Making.” Education Technology Research and Development 60 (2): 341–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, Brigitte, and Austin Hendersen. 1995. “Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice.” The Journal of the Learning Sciences 4 (1): 39–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jornet, Alfredo, and Wolff-Michael Roth. 2017. “Design {Thinking | Communicating}: A Sociogenetic Approach to Reflective Practice in Collaborative Design.” In Analyzing Design Thinking: Studies of Cross-cultural Co-creation, edited by B. Christensen, L. J. Ball, and K. Halskov, 331–347. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kunz, Werner, and Horst Rittel. 1970. Issues as Elements of Information Systems. 131 vols.Berkeley, CA: University of California, Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
   Google Scholar
• Kwon, Winston, Ian Clark, and Ruth Wodak. 2009. “Organizational Decision-making, Discourse, and Power: Integrating Across Contexts and Scales.” Discourse & Communication 3 (3): 273–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 2013. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, Bryan. 2004. “Schema, Gambits, and Precedent: Some Factors in Design Expertise.” Design Studies 25: 443–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBoeuf, Robyn, and Eldar Shafir. 2013. “Decision Making.” In The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, edited by K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison, 301–321. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, Ben. 2009. “Intersections of Brainstorming Rules and Social Order.” Codesign 5 (1): 65–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menz, Florian. 1999. “‘Who am I Gonna Do This with?’: Self-organization, Ambiguity, and Decision-making in a Business Enterprise.” Discourse & Society 10 (1): 101–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, Henry, Duru Raisinghani, and Andrè Theoret. 1976. “The Structure of “Unstructured” Decision Processes.” Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (2): 246–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, Harold, and Erik Stolterman. 2003. “Design Judgement: Decision-making in the ‘Real World’.” The Design Journal 6 (1): 23–31.
   Google Scholar
• Oak, Arlene. 2012. “‘You Can Argue It Two Ways’: The Collaborative Management of a Design Dilemma.” Design Studies 33: 630–648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orasanu, Judith, and Terry Connoly. 1993. “The Reinvention of Decision Making.” In Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods, edited by G. A. Klein, J. Orasanu, R. Calderwood, and C. Zsambok, 3–20. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, Wolff-Michael. 2001. “Designing as Distributed Process.” Learning and Instruction 11: 211–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, Wolff-Michael. 2016. “The Primacy of the Social and Sociogenesis.” Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 50: 122–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, Wolff-Michael. 2017. “The Gap Between Instruction (Plan) and Situated Action: A Challenge to Semiotics?” Semiotica. doi:10.1515/sem-2016-0084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, Wolff-Michael, and Alfredo Jornet. 2015. “Situational Awareness as an Instructable and Instructed Matter in Multimedia Supported Debriefing: A Case Study from Aviation.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 24: 461–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, Wolff-Michael, and Anita Roychoudhury. 1992. “The Social Construction of Scientific Concepts or the Concept Map as Conscription Device and Tool for Social Thinking in High School Science.” Science Education 76: 531–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, Emanuel. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. 1 vol. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, Herbert. 1957. Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Stevanovic, Melisa. 2012. “Establishing Joint Decisions in a Dyad.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 779–803.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, Lev Semionovich. 1989. “Concrete Human Psychology.” Soviet Psychology 27 (2): 53–77.
   Google Scholar
• Wasson, Christina. 2000. “Caution and Consensus in American Business Meetings.” Pragmatics 10 (4): 457–481.
   Google Scholar