Published
December 5, 2010
Keywords
- formal reason,
- naturalistic cognition,
- phenomenological knowing,
- situated cognition,
- human-centered design,
- vicarious function,
- Brunswik's lens model
...More
Less
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2005-2018 Journal of Research Practice (ISSN 1712 851X) and the authors
The copyright of the material published in the Journal of Research Practice (JRP) is held primarily by the respective author(s). By agreeing to publish their work in JRP, they permit the journal (JRP) to electronically reproduce and disseminate their work over the Internet, including measures to ensure continued availability of the work, should the journal ever be discontinued for any reason. However, the authors retain all rights over their articles, including self-archival, reproduction, commercial use, etc. After the authors, the copyright passes over to JRP, unless transferred by the authors to any other designated person or entity.
Readers are welcome to use these material with due acknowledgment to the source, as indicated in the suggested citation for each article. The readers can also print and make copies of JRP articles for the purpose of education, learning, and review. However, the articles cannot be used for any commercial purpose without the consent of the respective author(s).
Archival agencies, libraries, publishers, and other agencies associated with academic/scholarly publishing are welcome to contact the Editors to discuss any specific proposals they may have. If the proposal involves a commercial interest, they would be expected to share a part of their benefit with JRP.
Abstract
Naturalistic thinking and knowing, the tacit, experiential, and intuitive reasoning of everyday interaction, have long been regarded as inferior to formal reason and labeled primitive, fallible, subjective, superstitious, and in some cases ineffable. But, naturalistic thinking is more rational and definable than it appears. It is also relevant to design. Inquiry into the mechanisms of naturalistic thinking and knowledge can bring its resources into focus and enable designers to create better, human-centered designs for use in real-world settings. This article makes a case for the explicit, formal study of implicit, naturalistic thinking within the fields of design. It develops a framework for defining and studying naturalistic thinking and knowledge, for integrating them into design research and practice, and for developing a more integrated, consistent theory of knowledge in design. It will (a) outline historical definitions of knowledge, attitudes toward formal and naturalistic thinking, and the difficulties presented by the co-presence of formal and naturalistic thinking in design, (b) define and contrast formal and naturalistic thinking as two distinct human cognitive systems, (c) demonstrate the importance of naturalistic cognition in formal thinking and real-world judgment, (d) demonstrate methods for researching naturalistic thinking that can be of use in design, and (e) briefly discuss the impact on design theory of admitting naturalistic thinking as valid, systematic, and knowable.