Abstract
This study examines how novice designers justify prototype concept choices before and after parallel stakeholder testing in early-stage product development. Drawing on 99 survey responses collected across two checkpoints in a 16-week interdisciplinary design studio, we used an inductive-deductive coding approach to map emergent themes to innovation frames of desirability, feasibility, and viability. Six themes emerged: desirability (primarily perceived play value) dominated pre- and post-test reasoning, while feasibility (simplicity/modularity) and viability (production cost, market potential) shaped secondary trade-offs. Parallel testing prompted revisions when stakeholder engagement or client cues contradicted expectations; many students retained choices when testing validated initial impressions or when novelty and social validation reinforced commitment. Quantitatively, 67% (35/52) revised at least one choice in checkpoint 1, and 19% (9/47) in checkpoint 2. Findings show how novices interpret limited evidence under uncertainty and how testing redistributes attention, further informing our understanding of design practices of prototype testing and decision-making.
Keywords
prototype testing, novice designer, perception, decision-making
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.2497
Citation
Vang, P., and Lauff, C.A. (2026) Designing under uncertainty: How novices rationalize prototype choices before and after parallel testing, in Simeone, L., Gray, C. M., Verhoeven, A., de Götzen, A., Bakırlıoğlu, Y., Zohar, H., Stead, M., and Buwert, P. (eds.), DRS2026: Edinburgh, 8–12 June, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.2497
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Included in
Designing under uncertainty: How novices rationalize prototype choices before and after parallel testing
This study examines how novice designers justify prototype concept choices before and after parallel stakeholder testing in early-stage product development. Drawing on 99 survey responses collected across two checkpoints in a 16-week interdisciplinary design studio, we used an inductive-deductive coding approach to map emergent themes to innovation frames of desirability, feasibility, and viability. Six themes emerged: desirability (primarily perceived play value) dominated pre- and post-test reasoning, while feasibility (simplicity/modularity) and viability (production cost, market potential) shaped secondary trade-offs. Parallel testing prompted revisions when stakeholder engagement or client cues contradicted expectations; many students retained choices when testing validated initial impressions or when novelty and social validation reinforced commitment. Quantitatively, 67% (35/52) revised at least one choice in checkpoint 1, and 19% (9/47) in checkpoint 2. Findings show how novices interpret limited evidence under uncertainty and how testing redistributes attention, further informing our understanding of design practices of prototype testing and decision-making.