UNCOVERING CONCEPTS AS A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF ARCHITECTS' PREFERENCES IN THE DESIGN PROCESS

Jessica Fitriani Putri, Amos Setiadi

Abstract


Architects' preferences in design are often understood as a matter of individual taste or creative intuition, making them difficult to systematically interpret within an academic framework. This article proposes a reinterpretation of William M. Peña's Problem Seeking theory, with a particular focus on the Uncover Concepts stage, as a conceptual model for understanding the formation of architects' preferences in the design process. Through a qualitative-conceptual approach based on literature review, this article positions Uncover Concepts as a cognitive-reflective space where architects filter facts, needs, and constraints into conceptual directions that represent their professional orientation. This article integrates Peña's thinking with problem framing theory (Lawson), reflective practice (Schön), and the orientation of architects' professional practice (Coxe) to construct a conceptual model of design preferences relevant to contemporary practice. The conceptual findings show that Uncover Concepts functions as the main mechanism for forming architects' preferences before design decisions are realized in spatial form. This article contributes to the development of a theoretical framework for architects' preferences and offers implications for education and professional architectural practice.

A


Full Text:

PDF

References


Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard University Press.

Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. Oxford University Press.

Coxe, W. (1987). Managing Architectural and Engineering Practice. John Wiley & Sons.

Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Berg.

Galle, P., & Kovacs, L. (2020). What makes design reasoning special? Design Studies, 68, 1–28.

Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2014). The situated function–behaviour–structure framework. Design Studies, 35(4), 373–391.

Hamilton, K. (2022). Architectural design decision-making: Practice, process and cognition. Design Studies, 78, 1–15.

Heynen, H. (1999). Architecture and Modernity: A Critique. MIT Press.

Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62.

Lawson, B. (2006). How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified. Architectural Press.

Peña, W. M., & Parshall, S. A. (2012). Problem Seeking: An Architectural Programming Primer. Wiley.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action . Basic Books.

Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3, Ed.). MIT Press.

Suwa, M., Gero, J. S., & Purcell, T. (1999). Unexpected discoveries and S-invention of design requirements: A key to creative designs. Design Studies, 21(5), 539–567.

Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (2018). The reflective practice of design thinking. Design Studies, 54, 1–15.

Visser, W. (2007). Designing as construction of representations: A dynamic viewpoint in cognitive design research. CoDesign, 2(3), 169–178.

Walker, L. O., & Avant, K. C. (2019). Strategies for Theory Construction in Nursing (6, Ed.). Pearson.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jaz.v9i1.95360

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Jessica Fitriani Putri

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.