{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019182652210175146, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4171122994652405, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Method for Comparing Designers’ Behavior in Two Enviroments: Parametric and Geometric Modeling

Previous research into designers’ behaviour in parametric environments suggests that parametric tools support or promote design processes in a wide variety of ways. However, despite the results of such research, there is a lack of empirical evidence directly comparing how design in parametric environments differs from design in traditional environments. Aiming to address this issue, a pilot study is presented in this paper comparing designers’ behaviour in parametric design environments (PDEs) with that in more traditional, geometric modelling environments (GMEs). In the study five designers completed two design tasks respectively in PDEs and GMEs. By employing the method of protocol analysis, different behaviours in the two design environments were identified and compared. This paper focuses on the results of testing the experimental setting and of the coding scheme used in the study. One example set of results from the pilot study is reported – wherein the designer’s behaviour exhibits some differences between the two environments – in order to provide an example of the coding used.