Weihu Lu
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, China
Vanja Čok
LECAD Laboratory, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Rupeng Zhu
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, China
Ladda ner artikel
Ingår i: KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 100:95, s. 1135-1146
Publicerad: 2014-06-11
ISBN: 978-91-7519-276-5
ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)
In the recent marketplace; it’s necessary but no longer sufficient to offer a good functioning product. The emotional quality of products plays an important role for differential advantage. Particularly; globalized markets mean more intense competition than ever before. Understanding the users’ real emotional needs in different cultures is becoming a key strategy for the adaptation of products in overseas market. This proposed study elicits insights on cultural differences between European and Asian values and investigates how these affect user’s reaction to designed products. Two experimental studies of products’ emotional quality are carried out on European and Asian participants via Semantic Differential Method: one case is conducted with the shape contours (pellet burners) represented by Europeans and South Asians (Indian) respectively for the investigation of their shape preferences; another case is organized with prototype model defined with geometrical design attributes (eyeglasses frames) represented by Europeans and East Asians (Chinese) respectively in order to reveal the structure of shape meaning comprehension. After conducting statistical analysis; the result of this study helps to improve user satisfaction both within national and overseas markets. It’s useful for designers to identify and emphasize these shape features of new products which will stimulate the positive responses to required user preferences.
Cultural differences; Kansei Engineering; Semantic Differential Method; shape.
Chandrasekaran D.; Tellis G.J. (2008). Global Takeoff of New Products: Culture; Wealth or Vanishing Differences; Marketing Science; 27(5); 844-860.
Cho H.S.; Lee J. (2005). Development of a macroscopic model on recent fashion trends on the basis of customer emotion. International Journal of Consumer Studies; 29 (1); 17-33.
Cho S.; Gonzales R.; Yoon C. (2011). Cross-Cultural difference in the Preference of the cute Products: Asymetric dominance effect with product designs; Proceedings of IASDR 2011.
Crilly N. (2011). Do Users Know What Designers Are Up To? Product Experience and the Inference of Persuasive Intentions; International Journal of Design; 5(3); 1-15.
Demirbilek O.; Sener B. (2004). Product design; semantics and emotional response; Ergonomics; Vol. 46; Nos. 13/14; 1346-1360.
Desmet; P. M. A.; Hekkert; P. (2007). Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design; 1(1); 57-66.
Diehl J.C.; Christiaans H.H.C.M. (2006). Globalization and cross cultural product design; Proceedings of International Design Conference 2006; Dubrovnik; Croatia; 503-509.
Dumaine B. (1991). Design that sells and sells and……; Fortune; March 11; 86-94.
Hawkins D.I.; Mothersbaugh D.L. (2011). Consumer Behavior; 11th Edition; McGraw-Hill Education (Asia) and China Machine Press; Beijing.
Hsu S.H.; Chuang M.C.; Chang C.C. (2000). A semantic differential study of designers’ and users’ product form perception; International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics; 25(4); 375-391.
Hsiao K.A; Chen L.L.; Wang C.F.; Tsang H.T. (2006). Fundamental dimensions of affective responses to product shapes; International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics; Vol. 36; 553-564.
Huang T.K.; Ma M.Y.; Tseng W.C. (2010). Preference-based analysis of black plastic frame glasses; Proceedings of International Conference on Kansei Engineering and Emotion Research 2010; Paris; France; 226-235.
Inoue K.; Nakamura C.; Ito K. (2004). The investigation analysis of preference factor about glasses design for women; from http://www.iris.dti.ne.jp/~inouek/special/pdfs/st11.pdf
Kuller R. (1975). Semantic description of environment; Stockholm: Byggforskningsradet.
Lo C.H.; Chu C.H. (2009). Affective Modelling: Profiling Geometrical Models with Human Emotional Responses; Pacific Graphics; 28(7); 1811-1820.
Lu W.; Petiot J-F. (2012). Elicitation and Modeling of User’s Emotional Responses Using a Sound Based Protocol: Application to Glasses Frame; Proceedings of the International Conference on Kansei Engineering and Emotion Research; KEER 2012; Penghu; Taiwan; 753-761.
Lu W. (2013). Contribution to the Affective Design of Products – An Audio-based Approach for the Study of Users’ Emotions; PhD Thesis; Ecole Centrale de Nantes; Nantes; France.
Nisbett R.E; (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently…and why. New York: Free Press
Osgood; C.E.; Suci; G.J. and Tannenbaum; P.H. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning; University of Illinois Press; Urbana; USA.
Uchida Y.; Norasakkunkit V.; Kitayama S. (2004). Cultural constructions of happiness: theory and empirical evidence; Journal of Happiness Studies; 5(3); 223-239.
Yanagisawa H.; Fukuda S. (2004). Interactive design support system by customer evaluation and genetic evolution: application to eye glass frame; In Palade V.; Howlett R.J.; Jain L.C. (Eds.): KES 2003; LNAI2774; Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 481-487.
Zhang Y.; Feick L.; Prince L.J. (2006). The Impact of Self-Construal on Aesthetic Preference for Angular Versus Rounded Shapes; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin; Vol.32 No.6; 794-805.
