Abstract
ABSTRACT The consensus-based assessment has long been a prevalent methodology employed in “panel crit” settings in design education and professional design awards. Acknowledging the subjective nature of design evaluation and its importance to the design development process, we report two studies investigating the effect of three levels of design expertise (expert, quasi-expert, and novice) on the evaluation of award-winning lamp designs using the consensual assessment technique (CAT). The pilot study (N = 30) preliminarily examined expertise-related differences in evaluation outcome (i.e., ratings and rankings) and the use of the CAT instrument. In a follow-up study (N = 135), we tested four hypotheses using the refined CAT instrument. Results showed a significant interaction effect between expertise group and design on evaluation. Correlations between groups showed that quasi-experts were more similar to novices than experts. This finding contributes to the discussion on whether quasi-experts should be considered proper substitutes for experts. Furthermore, the reliability of ratings on individual CAT scale items varied among groups, suggesting that the degree to which raters were consistent within a group depends upon which aspect of design quality they were assessing. Taken together, the findings provide valuable insights into the influence of design education and experience on judging design quality.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.