Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies

Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies

Conceptual Dimensions and Characteristics of Abductive Reasoning in Design Practice

Document Type : Original

Authors
Ali Qoreishvandi Abraki 1
ali alai 2
Keivan Jourabchi 3
Saeid Norouzian Maleki 4
1 Ph.D. Candidate of Architecture, Shahid Beheshti University.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University.
3 Assistant Professor, Center for Documentation and Studies of Iranian Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University.
4 Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University,
10.22052/jias.2026.258353.1486
Abstract
Abductive reasoning is widely recognized as the fundamental core of design thinking the understanding of which is, therefore, essential to the design domain, particularly in relation to how it operates within architectural design practice. Such understanding requires a comprehensive examination of abductive reasoning in terms of its conceptual dimensions and characteristics, as well as its connection to the processes of design activity. This study aimed to identify and organize the key attributes of abductive reasoning and to elucidate its role in architectural design practice. The research adopted a qualitative approach based on thematic analysis and employed a systematic review methodology following a seven‑stage protocol. The research corpus initially consisted of 46 sources retrieved up to August 2025 from three databases, namely Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. After quality appraisal and the removal of duplicates, 14 journal articles and one chapter in a book were selected for analysis. The data were examined through coding and interpretive thematic analysis. The findings resulted in a cyclical conceptual model comprising five interrelated conceptual clusters: the nature of abductive reasoning; activation contexts and triggers; cognitive mechanisms; operational strategies; and individual characteristics and outcomes. The results indicated that abductive reasoning was activated when designers encountered ambiguity. Meanwhile, through processes such as framing and visualization, abductive reasoning progressed toward conjectural testing and reflective evaluation, ultimately leading to sensemaking, holistic understanding, innovation, and originality in design practice.
Keywords
Design Thinking
Design Reasoning
Abductive Reasoning
Framing
Ambiguity Management
 اسلامی، غلامرضا. ۱۳۹۳. مبانی نظری معماری (عینکمان را خودمان بسازیم). تهران: فکر نو.
 رضائی، رحمت‌الله. ۱۳۸۷. حکمت و تزکیۀ نفس و رابطۀ آن‌ها در حکمت متعالیۀ حدس و جایگاه آن از دیدگاه ابن‌سینا. فصلنامۀ معرفت فلسفی ۵ (۳): ۱۴۵ـ۱۹۲.
 سید مظهری، منیره. ۱۳۹۰. تحلیل مفهوم حدس و کارآیی آن از دیدگاه ابن‌سینا. حکمت سینوی (مشکوة النور) ۱۵ (۴۶): ۵ـ.
 شهریاری، شهرام. ۱۴۰۲. یکسانی روش‌شناختی معرفت علمی و معرفت دینی و پیامدهای آن. پژوهش‌نامۀ فلسفۀ دین (نامه حکمت) ۲۱ (۲): ۲۵ـ۴۷.
 محمودی، سید امیرسعید. ۱۳۸۳. تفکر در طراحی: معرفی الگوی تفکر تعاملی در آموزش طراحی. هنرهای زیبا (۲۰): ۲۷ـ۳۶.
Almendra, R. A., and H. Christiaans. 2009. Decision Making in the Conceptual Design Phases: A Comparative Study. Journal of Design Research 8 (1): 1-22.
Ball, L. J., J. S. B. T. Evans, I. Dennis, and T. C. Ormerod. 1997. Problem-Solving Strategies and Expertise in Engineering Design. Thinking & Reasoning 3 (4): 247-270.
Bellucci, F. 2018. Eco and Peirce on Abduction. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 10 (1).
Benson, J., and S. Dresdow. 2017. The Role of Abductive Reasoning in Conversation Design. International Journal of Pedagogy and Curriculum 24 (1): 27-39.
Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77-101.
Brent, R. 1978. Design and the Problem Solving Process. Journal of Interior Design Education and Research 4 (2): 30-35.
Buchanan, R. 1992. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues 8 (2): 5-21.
Cassim, F. 2020. Decolonising Design Education through Playful Learning in a Tertiary Communication Design Programme in South Africa. International Journal of Art and Design Education 39 (3): 523-535.
Clayton, P. 1997. Inference to the Best Explanation. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 32 (3): 377-391.
Clemmensen, T., A. Ranjan, and M. Bødker. 2018. How Cultural Knowledge Shapes Core Design Thinking—A Situation Specific Analysis. CoDesign 14 (2): 115-132.
Cramer-Petersen, C. L., and S. Ahmed-Kristensen. 2016. Argumentation and Reasoning in Design: An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Verbal Reasoning on Idea Value in Group Idea Generation. Proceedings of the DESIGN 2016 14th International Design Conference, 957-966.
Cross, N. 2006. Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer.
Darke, J. 1979. The Primary Generator and the Design Process. Design Studies 1 (1): 36-44.
Dong, A., D. Lovallo, and R. Mounarath. 2015. The Effect of Abductive Reasoning on Concept Selection Decisions. Design Studies, no. 37: 37-58.
Dong, A., M. Garbuio, and D. Lovallo. 2016. Generative Sensing in Design Evaluation. Design Studies, no. 45: 68-91.
Dorst, K. 2003. Exploring the Structure of Design Problems. Proceedings of ICED 03.
Dorst, K. 2011. The Core of Design Thinking and Its Application. Design Studies 32 (6): 521-532.
Dorst, K. 2015. Frame Creation and Design in the Expanded Field. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 1 (1): 22-33.
Dorst, K. 2019. Design beyond Design. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 5 (2): 117-127.
Douven, I. 2025. Abduction. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University.
Hall, A., T. Mayer, I. Wuggetzer, and P. R. Childs. 2013. Future Aircraft Cabins and Design Thinking: Optimisation vs Win-Win Scenarios. Propulsion and Power Research 2 (2): 85-95.
Harman, G. H. 1965. The Inference to the Best Explanation. The Philosophical Review 74 (1): 88-95.
Josephson, J. R., and S. G. Josephson. 1994. Abductive Inference: Computation, Philosophy, Technology. Cambridge University Press.
Kolko, J. 2010. Abductive Thinking and Sensemaking: The Drivers of Design Synthesis. Design Issues 26 (1): 15-28.
Koskela, L., S. Paavola, and E. Kroll. 2018. The Role of Abduction in Production of New Ideas in Design. In Advancements in the Philosophy of Design. Springer.
Kostman, S. 1978. Shared Problem Solving, Decision Making. NASSP Bulletin 62 (414): 64-68.
Kroll, E., P. Le Masson, and B. Weil. 2023. Abduction and Design Theory: Disentangling the Two Notions to Unbound Generativity in Science. In Handbook of Abductive Cognition. Springer.
Lawson, B. 2006. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified. Routledge.
Lipton, P. 2003. Inference to the Best Explanation. Routledge.
Lu, S. C. Y., and A. Liu. 2012. Abductive Reasoning for Design Synthesis. CIRP Annals 61 (1): 143-146.
Magnani, L. 2009. Abductive Cognition: The Epistemological and Eco-Cognitive Dimensions of Hypothetical Reasoning. Springer.
Magnani, L. 2023. Handbook of Abductive Cognition. Springer.
Magnani, L., W. Carnielli, and C. Pizzi. 2010. Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology: Abduction, Logic, and Computational Discovery. Springer.
March, L. 1976. The Logic of Design and the Question of Value. In The Architecture of Form. Cambridge University Press.
Martin, R. L. 2007. Becoming an Integrative Thinker. Rotman Magazine, 4-9.
Mohammadian, M. 2021. Abduction, the Context of Discovery + Underdetermination = Inference to the Best Explanation. Synthese, no. 198: 4205-4228.
Nowell, L. S., J. M. Norris, D. E. White, and N. J. Moules. 2017. Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16 (1).
Peirce, C. S. 1992. The Essential Peirce, Volume 2: Selected Philosophical Writings (1893–1913). Indiana University Press.
Polanyi, M. 1966. The Tacit Dimension. University of Chicago Press.
Rellstab, D. H. 2008. Peirce for Linguistic Pragmaticists. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 44 (2): 312-345.
Rittel, H. W. J., and M. M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences 4 (2): 155-169.
Schon, D. A. 1992. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Routledge.
Shearer, A. W. 2015. Abduction to Argument: A Framework of Design Thinking. Landscape Journal 34 (2): 127-138.
Tang, A., A. Aleti, J. Burge, and H. Van Vliet. 2010. What Makes Software Design Effective? Design Studies 31 (6): 614-640.
Torres-Sánchez, P., A. M. Juárez, and J. Miranda. 2024. Education 4.0 Framework for Sustainable Entrepreneurship through Transdisciplinary and Abductive Thinking: A Case Study. Frontiers in Education, no. 9.
Vignoli, M., C. Dosi, and B. Balboni. 2023. Design Thinking Mindset: Scale Development and Validation. Studies in Higher Education 48 (6): 926-940.
Wang, X., and C. Pasquero. 2024. Ecological Thinking in Regenerative Architecture: Relevance of Abduction in ecoLogic Studio’s Deep Green Research Project. Journal of Chinese Architecture and Urbanism 6 (1).
Wright, R. W., R. A. Brand, W. Dunn, and K. P. Spindler. 2007. How to Write a Systematic Review. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 455: 23-29.
Yeoman, P., and L. Carvalho. 2019. Moving between Material and Conceptual Structure: Developing a Card-Based Method to Support Design for Learning. Design Studies, no. 64: 64-89.
Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies
Volume 15, Issue 29
September 2026
Pages 179-203