Abstract
Design cognition is often described through a heuristics-and-biases lens that foregrounds systematic errors such as anchoring, fixation, and premature narrowing. Yet in professional practice, the same patterns may function as adaptive strategies for coping with ambiguity, constraint, and ill-defined problems. This paper examines how bias-like tendencies appear in expert data visualization work using a multi-phase qualitative study with 11 professional designers. We analyze situated episodes through two contrastive interpretive lenses: a bias lens that highlights potential distortions, and an adaptive-expertise lens that treats the same tendencies as resource-rational strategies. We situate these interpretations within a broader design cognition perspective, drawing on concepts such as framing, problem–solution co-evolution, and judgment. Our findings show that putative biases often enable tractable progress and sensemaking under bounded project conditions. We argue for a context-sensitive account of cognitive bias in design and discuss implications for theory, methods, and education.
Keywords
cognitive bias, heuristics, design cognition, design judgment
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.2581
Citation
Parsons, P., Agrawal, S., Bui, P., Shukla, P., and Baigelenov, A. (2026) Bias Reconsidered: Ecologically Rational Heuristics in Design Cognition, 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.2026.2581
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Included in
Bias Reconsidered: Ecologically Rational Heuristics in Design Cognition
Design cognition is often described through a heuristics-and-biases lens that foregrounds systematic errors such as anchoring, fixation, and premature narrowing. Yet in professional practice, the same patterns may function as adaptive strategies for coping with ambiguity, constraint, and ill-defined problems. This paper examines how bias-like tendencies appear in expert data visualization work using a multi-phase qualitative study with 11 professional designers. We analyze situated episodes through two contrastive interpretive lenses: a bias lens that highlights potential distortions, and an adaptive-expertise lens that treats the same tendencies as resource-rational strategies. We situate these interpretations within a broader design cognition perspective, drawing on concepts such as framing, problem–solution co-evolution, and judgment. Our findings show that putative biases often enable tractable progress and sensemaking under bounded project conditions. We argue for a context-sensitive account of cognitive bias in design and discuss implications for theory, methods, and education.