디지털 환경이 창의적인 디자인 사고와 인지과정에 미치는 영향 - AutoCAD와 SketchUp 사용을 중심으로 -

The Effect of the Digital Design Environment on Creative Design Thinking and Cognitive Processes - Focused on AutoCAD and SketchUp -

  • 투고 : 2016.06.25
  • 심사 : 2016.09.26
  • 발행 : 2016.09.30


This research adopted the assumption that the characteristics of digital tools differ from those of conventional tools and that these two tools affect creativity differently in the design processes. An empirical study was carried out to grasp the effect of the use of sketching and digital tools on students' creative behaviors and to ascertain any differences in behaviors. A coding scheme was developed to measure students' creative design thinking processes and spatial cognitive behaviors. Female senior students studying interior design at universities in Seoul participated in the study. They had all completed a basic modelling and sketching course. It was found that participants used digital tools as much as they did sketching in the early design process. The participants then used the digital tools to expand the visual notes that they developed during sketching while either reflecting on the design guidelines or thinking about the design. Further, duplex tool changeovers occurred naturally throughout the design process and allowed participants to find an appropriate solution and improved their creative thinking in the design processes. This research showed that interactions between sketching and digital tools have new potential in design processes and that each tool has different effects on students' design thinking and cognitive processes. Design education programmes and study guidelines should be developed to encourage students to creatively use design tools in the design process.



연구 과제 주관 기관 : 한국연구재단


  1. Akin, O. (1993). Architects' Reasoning with Structures and Functions, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 20, 273-294.
  2. Balasubramanian, V., Turoff, M., & Ullman, D. (1998). A systematic approach to support the idea generation phase of the user interface design process, Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii international conference, Kohala Coast, HI, USA.
  3. Boden, M. A. (1998). Creativity and artificial intelligence, Artificial Intelligence, 103(1-2), 347-356.
  4. Cross, N., Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. (1996). Analysing Design Activity, Chichester, Wiley, 23-27.
  5. Chen, S. C. (2001). The Role of Design Creativity in Computer Media, The 19th CAAD conference, Helsinki, Finland, 226-231.
  6. Chen, H. H., & You, M. L. (2006). Comparison of sketching activities with traditional and digital tools in graphic design, Journal of Design, 11(4), 113-135.
  7. Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MIT Press, 25.
  8. Gero, J. S., & McNeill, T. (1998) An Approach to the Analysis of Design Protocols, Design Studies, 19(1), 21-61.
  9. Goldschmidt, G. (1994). On visual design thinking: The vis kids of architecture, Design Studies, 15(2), 158-174.
  10. Ibrahim, R., & Rahimian, F. P. (2011). Comparison of CAD and Manual Sketching Sools for Teaching Architectural Design, Automation in Construction, 19(8), 978-987.
  11. Kim, M. J. (2006). The effects of tangilble user interfaces on designers' spatial cognition, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Sydney.
  12. Lewis, W. P., & Bonollo, E. (2002). An analysis of professional skills in design: Implication for education and research, Design Studies, 23(4), 385-406.
  13. Lee, Y. (2009). Digital Morphogenesis of Parametric Design System, Journal of Korea Design Knowledge, 9, 54-62.
  14. Lee, J. (2014). A Study on the Paradigm of Morhpogenesis in the Digital Architecture - Focused on the Digital Materiality and Dynamic Geometry in Morphogenesis, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Planning and Design Section, 16(1), 121-130.
  15. Maher, M. L., & Tang, H-H. (2003). Co-evolution as a Computational and Cognitive Model of Design, Research in Engineering Design, 14(1), 47-64.
  16. Menezes, A., & Lawson, B. (2006). How designers perceive sketches, Design Studies, 27(5), 571-585.
  17. Oxman, R. (2008). Digital Architecture as a Challenge for Design Pedagogy: Theory, Knowledge, Models and Medium, Design Studies, 29, 99-120.
  18. Park, S. J. (2016). An Analysis on the Correlations between Atypical Form of Contemporary Architecture and Digital Design Tool Commands, Journal of Basic Design & Art, 17(2), 129-143.
  19. Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Drawings and the design process: A review of protocol studies in design and other disciplines and related research in cognitive psychology, Design Studies, 19(4), 389-430.
  20. Salman, H. S., Laing, R., & Conniff, A. (2014). The Impact of Computer Aided Architectural Design Programs on conceptual Design in Educational Context. Design Studies, 35(4), 412-439.
  21. Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems, Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181-201.
  22. Suwa, M., Purcell, T., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers' cognitive actions, Design Studies, 19(4), 455-483.
  23. Tang, H. H., Lee, Y. Y., & Gero, J. S. (2011). Comparing collaborative co-located and distributed design processes in digital and traditional sketching environments: A protocol study using the function behaviour structure coding scheme, Design Studies, 32(1), 1-29.
  24. Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: a practical guide to modelling cognitive processes, London, Academic Press, 129.
  25. Vega, M. D., Marschark, M., Intons-Peterson, M. J., Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Denis, M. (1996). Representations of Visuospatial Cognition: A Discussion, Models of Visuospatial Cognition, New York, Oxford University Press, 198-226.