Analysis of process of self-driven design activity based on designer’s intrinsic motivation: case study of a professional graphic designer

References

• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. E., & Helstrup, T. (1993). Visual discovery in mind and on paper. Memory & Cognition, 21(3), 283–293. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208261
   Google Scholar
• Chidamber, S. R., & Kon, H. B. (1993). A research retrospective of innovation inception and success: The technology-push demand-pull question. “PROFIT” Research Initiative, Sloan School of Management, MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (1994). Engineering design methods: Strategies for product design. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Berg Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety: Experiencing flow in work and play. Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2015). The systems model of creativity: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M., Larson, R., & Prescott, S. (1977). The ecology of adolescent activity and experience. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 6(3), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02138940
   Google Scholar
• Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6
   Google Scholar
• Dorta, T., Pérez, E., & Lesage, A. (2008). The ideation gap: Hybrid tools, design flow and practice. Design Studies, 29(2), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.12.004
   Google Scholar
• Dubberly, H. (2004). How do you design? A compendium of models [Online PDF Document]. http://www.dubberly.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/ddo_designprocess.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• French, M. J. (1985). Conceptual design for engineers. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Günther, J., Frankenberger, E., & Auer, P. (1996). Investigation of individual and team design process. Investigation of Individual and Team Design Process. In Cross, N., Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. (Eds.), Analyzing Design Activity (117–131). Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jagtap, S. (2018). Intentions and inspiration in shaping visual appearance of products: The practice of professional industrial designers in India. The Design Journal, 21(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2018.1396075
   Google Scholar
• Jagtap, S., Larsson, A., Hiort, V., Olander, E., Warell, A., & Khadilkar, P. (2014). How design process for the base of the pyramid differs from that for the top of the pyramid. Design Studies, 35(5), 527–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.02.007
   Google Scholar
• Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12023
   Google Scholar
• Jones, J. C., & Thornley, D. G. (1963). Conference on design method, Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kinoshita, Y. (2003). Practice of grounded theory approach: Invitation to qualitative research. Koubundou. in Japanese.
   Google Scholar
• Laing, S., Apperley, M., & Masoodian, M. (2017). Investigating the effects of client imagery on the ideation process of graphic design. Design Studies, 53, 78–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2017.08.001
   Google Scholar
• Laing, S., & Masoodian, M. (2015). A study of the role of visual information in supporting ideation in graphic design. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(6), 1199–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23231
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, B. (2005). How designers think. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maher, M. L., Poon, J., & Boulanger, S. (1996). Formalising design exploration as co-evolution. In Gero, J., & Sudweeks, F. (Eds.), Advances in Formal Design Methods for CAD (3–30). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Takashima, K., & Senoo, D. (2016, December). Process analysis of designer’s spontaneous activity: A case study of professional character designer. A-DEWS2016. asia design engineering workshop 2016. The Design Society.
   Google Scholar
• Taura, T. (2014). Creative design engineering. University of Tokyo Press. in Japanese.
   Google Scholar
• Taura, T., & Nagai, Y. (2017). Creativity in innovation design: The roles of intuition, synthesis, and hypothesis. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 5(3–4), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2017.1313132
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2003). Product design and development. McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Veryzer, R. W., & de Mozota, B. (2005). The impact of user‐oriented design on new product development: An examination of fundamental relationships. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00110.x
   Google Scholar
• Worinkeng, E., Joshi, S., & Summers, J. D. (2015). An experimental study: Analyzing requirement type influence on novelty and variety of generated solutions. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 3(2), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2014.909294
   Google Scholar