Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFrey, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorHerder, Paulien M.
dc.contributor.authorWijnia, Ype
dc.contributor.authorSubrahmanian, Eswaran
dc.contributor.authorKatsikopoulos, Konstantinos
dc.contributor.authorde Neufville, Richard
dc.contributor.authorOye, Kenneth A.
dc.contributor.authorClausing, Don P.
dc.date.accessioned2012-05-11T00:10:39Z
dc.date.available2012-05-11T00:10:39Z
dc.date.issued2010-02
dc.date.submitted2010-01
dc.identifier.issn0934-9839
dc.identifier.issn1435-6066
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70575
dc.description.abstractThe editors of this journal have offered an opportunity to reply to Dr. Hazelrigg’s letter in depth. Indeed, with its numerous points of critique of the paper ‘‘The Pugh Controlled Convergence method’’ (Frey et al. 2009) stated so strongly, the letter demands a detailed rebuttal. We provide a response to the specific points discussed in the letter as well as the broader issues raised. Writing on these topics has been an opportunity to explore some issues of interest to us, including the role of mathematical theory and empirical science in design research. To pursue this fully, additional authors participated to add more varied expertise on social sciences, preference measurement, and industry practices. We hope that our response will do more than defend the paper; we hope that it will also suggest some constructive paths forward in design research.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Science Foundation (U.S.) (grant #0448972)en_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherSpringer-Verlagen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-010-0085-2en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attributionen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/en_US
dc.sourceMIT web domainen_US
dc.titleResearch in engineering design: the role of mathematical theory and empirical evidenceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationFrey, Daniel D. et al. “Research in Engineering Design: The Role of Mathematical Theory and Empirical Evidence.” Research in Engineering Design 21.3 (2010): 145–151. Web.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mechanical Engineeringen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Scienceen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Divisionen_US
dc.contributor.approverOye, Kenneth A.
dc.contributor.mitauthorOye, Kenneth A.
dc.contributor.mitauthorFrey, Daniel
dc.contributor.mitauthorKatsikopoulos, Konstantinos
dc.contributor.mitauthorde Neufville, Richard
dc.contributor.mitauthorClausing, Don P.
dc.relation.journalResearch in Engineering Designen_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dspace.orderedauthorsFrey, Daniel D.; Herder, Paulien M.; Wijnia, Ype; Subrahmanian, Eswaran; Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos; Neufville, Richard; Oye, Ken; Clausing, Don P.en
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9811-8415
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9886-7512
mit.licensePUBLISHER_CCen_US
mit.metadata.statusComplete


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record