visceral hedonic rhetoric - qut · area of new investigation: visceral hedonic rhetoric. in this...
TRANSCRIPT
VISCERAL HEDONIC RHETORIC
Cara Jayd Wrigley Bachelor of Industrial Design (Queensland University of Technology)
Bachelor of Design Studies (Griffith University)
School of Design
Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering
Queensland University of Technology
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
2011
ii
iii
Dedication
To my loving father Dr Jack Wrigley for his hereditary thirst for knowledge.
iv
v
Keywords
Visceral hedonic rhetoric
Emotional cognition
Visceral design
Product design
Design and emotion
Product rhetoric
Consumer hedonics
Product aesthetics
vi
Abstract
Emotional responses can incite and entice consumers to select a particular product
from a row of similar items and thus have a considerable impact on purchase
decisions. Consequently, more and more companies are challenging designers to
address the emotional impact of their work and to design for emotion and consumer-
product relationships. Furthermore, the creation of emotional attachment to one’s
possessions is one way of approaching a sustainable consumer-product relationship.
The aim of this research is to gain a deeper understanding of the instantaneous
emotional attachment that consumers form with products and its subsequent
implications for product development. The foci of the study are visceral design,
consumer hedonics and product rhetoric. Studied in a conglomerate they become an
area of new investigation: visceral hedonic rhetoric. In this context, the term
“visceral hedonic rhetoric” is defined as the properties of a product that persuasively
elicit the pursuit of pleasure at an instinctual level of cognition.
This study explores visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in the design of interactive
products and resides within the context of emotional design research. It employs an
empirical approach to understand how consumers respond hedonically on a visceral
level to rhetoric in products. Specifically, it examines visceral hedonic responses
given by thirty participants to the stimuli of six mobile telephones, six Mp3 players
and six USB memory flash drives.
The study findings demonstrate a hierarchy of visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in
interactive products. This hierarchy of visceral hedonic attributes include: colour,
size, shape, intrigue, material, perceived usability, portability, perceived function,
novelty, analogy, brand, quality, texture and gender. However, it is the inter-
relationships between these visceral hedonic attributes that are the most significant
findings of this research. Certain associations were revealed between product
attribute combinations and consumer perception. The most predominant of these
vii
were: gender bias associated with colour selection; the creation of intrigue through a
vibrant attention-grabbing colour; perceived ease of use and function; product
confidence as a result of brand familiarity and perceived usability; analogous
association through familiarity with similar objects and shapes; and the association of
longevity with quality, novelty or recent technology.
A significant outcome of the research is the distillation of visceral hedonic rhetoric
design principles, and a tool to assist designers in harnessing the full potential of
visceral hedonic rhetoric. This study contributes to the identification of the emerging
research field of visceral hedonic rhetoric. Application of this study’s findings has
the potential to provide a hedonic consumer-product relationship that is more
meaningful, less disposable and more sustainable. This theory of visceral hedonic
rhetoric is not only a significant contribution to design knowledge but is also
generally transferable to other research domains, as later suggested in future research
avenues.
viii
Table of Contents Dedication …………………………………………………………………………………….iii Keywords ………………………………………………………………………………………v Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………..vi Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………………..…viii Statement of Original Authorship …………………………………………………………xi Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………………xiii Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………………1 1.1 Background ………………………………………………………………………1 1.2 Research Problem …………………………………………………..……………4 1.3 Research Aim and Objectives ……………………………………………………5 1.4 Research Questions ………………………………………………………………6 1.5 Qualitative Research Approach ……………………………………….…………6 1.6 Thesis Structure ……………………………………………………………….…7
Chapter 2: Emotion and the Design Dialogue ………………………...…………11 2.1 Describing Emotions and Emotional Cognition ……………..…………………11 2.2 Emotional Consumers and Designing for Their Needs ………….…..…………15 2.3 The Design Dialogue ……………………………………...……………………17 2.4 Emotional Cognition: The Three Levels ………………..………………………18 2.5 Affect ..…………………………………………………………………………21 2.6 Action …………………………………………………………………………...22 2.7 A Framework for the Design Dialogue …………………………………………22 2.8 Summary …………………………………………………………………..……28 Chapter 3: Visceral Design …………………………………………………….....33 3.1 The Missing Link in Emotional Design ...………………………………………33 3.2 Describing the Visceral …………………………………………………………39 3.3 Visceral Perception and Judgements …………………………………………..40 3.4 Visceral Design and Product Attributes ………………………………...………44 3.5 Summary …………………………………………………………………..……47 Chapter 4: Consumer Hedonics ……………………………………………….....51 4.1 Hedonics: The Pursuit of Pleasure ………………………………………...……51 4.2 Hedonic Consumption ………………………………………………………….52 4.3 Consumer Choices and Decisions ………………………………………………55 4.4 Summary ………………………………………………………………………..59 Chapter 5: Product Rhetoric ……………………………………………………..63 5.1 Visual Rhetoric: Interpreting the Visual Media ………………………………...64 5.2 Design Rhetoric: A Product Language …………………………………………65 5.3 Product Rhetoric: The Language of Successful Products ………………………68 5.4 Summary ……………………………………………………………………..…71
ix
Chapter 6: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric……………………………………………73 6.1 Defining Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric ……………………………………………73 6.2 Literature Summary ……………………………………………………….……73 6.3 Identifying Deficiencies in Current Knowledge ………………………………..77 6.4 Implications …………………………………………………………………..…79 Chapter 7: Methodology ………………………………………………..…………83 7.1 Interactive Products ………………………………………………….…………83 7.2 Methods Review ………………………………………………..………………85 7.3 Methodology Approach and Design ……………………………………………89 7.4 Data Collection Procedures …………………………………………..…………92 7.5 Summary ……………………………………………………………………..…97 Chapter 8: Analysis and Results …………………………………….……………99 8.1 The Coding Scheme …………………………………………………….………99 8.2 Relationship Coding ………………………………………...…………………103 8.3 Results …………………………………………………………………………105 8.4 Visceral Rhetoric …………………………………………………………...…105 8.5 Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric ……………………………………….……………111 8.6 Relationships ……………………………………………………..……………117 8.7 Summary ………………………………………………………………………120 Chapter 9: Findings and Discussion……………………………………………..123 9.1 Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric ………………………………………………….…123 9.2 Visceral Hedonic Response Relationships ………………………….…………137 9.3 Visceral Hedonic Response Relationship Clusters ……………………………149 9.4 The Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Dialogue ……………………..………151 9.5 Summary ………………………………………………………………………152 Chapter 10: Conclusion …………………………………………….……………155 10.1 Design Recommendations ………………………………………………...…157 10.2 Contribution and Transfer of Knowledge ……………………………………164 10.3 Implications ……………………………………………………..……………167 10.4 Limitations ………………………………………………………...…………168 10.5 Future Work ………………………………………………………….………168 10.6 The Final Word ………………………………………………………………170 References…………………………………………………………………………173 Appendices………………………………………………………………….……..193 Appendix A: Participant Information Pack ………………………………………..194 Appendix B: Screening Questionnaire ………………………………………….…196 Appendix C: Interview Instructions …………………………………………….…198 Appendix D: Participant Demographics ………………………………………..…199 Appendix E: Example Transcript ………………………………………………….201 Appendix F: Visceral Coding Scheme Application ……………………………….202 Appendix G: Hedonic Coding Scheme Application ……………………………....204 Appendix H: Visceral Rhetoric Hierarchy Example ………………………...……206 Appendix I: Visceral Hedonic Relationship Coding Scheme Application …….….207 Appendix J: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Tool Storyboard Scenario……….209
x
xi
Statement of Original Authorship
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet
requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the
best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Signed
Cara Jayd Wrigley
April 2011
xii
xiii
Acknowledgments
I wish to acknowledge and thank the following people for their encouragement and
support over the last four years of research:
Firstly, Professor Vesna Popovic and Dr Marianella Chamorro-Koc who supervised
this project; I thank them both and appreciate their support. Thank you to my fellow
colleagues in the School of Design, and the Faculty of Built Environment and
Engineering, especially Rafael Gomez, Dr Ben Kraal, Dr Thea Blackler, Rebekah
Davis, Dr Evonne Miller and Andrew Scott who have been there over the years to
offer advice and guidance in my times of need. A special mention to Shaun Gregory
and Simon Lawry, fellow postgraduate researchers who have been there from the
early days.
To my mentor Associate Professor Sam Bucolo who has been my beacon of hope
and voice of rationality when times were tough and things seemed impossible. Also,
a special thank you to Dr Judy Matthews for all her kind words, wisdom and
guidance.
Thank you to my family who have had to endure many sacrifices for my education
over the years; you have made this opportunity and accomplishment possible. To my
cousin Kristin Carey, an amazing woman who has taught me so much and to whom I
am forever grateful. A special thank you to Loraine and Donald Reid who always
believed in me and provided much support and encouragement over the years.
To my favourite designer Kirsti Tenni and the girls, who started this journey with me
many years ago as teenage design students and fell in love with design just as I did.
Lastly, thank you to all the participants involved who gave up their time to take part
in this study; without them, it would not have been possible.
xiv
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Consumer-product relationships have previously been studied by many different
fields (Desmet, 2002; Norman, 2002; O’Shaughnessy, 2003), indicating a link
between positive product attachment and a successful emotionally-designed product.
It is the strength of this attachment that can override many other factors in a purchase
decision, such as cost and practicality. This research aims to assist in understanding
why and how products create this emotional attachment and to allow designers to
utilise this knowledge in the future.
1.1 Background
All products elicit some kind of emotional response from the consumer whether it is
good, bad, intentional or unintentional. The emotional attachment existing between
product and consumer is paramount to the success or failure of a product (Overbeeke
and Hekkert, 1999). Emotional responses can entice consumers to select a particular
product from a row of similar items, thereby exerting considerable influence on
purchase decisions. Consequently, more and more companies are challenging
designers to manipulate the emotional impact of their work and make design
decisions to support emotional attachment. Consumer-product attachment also has
the potential to promote longer-term relationships between consumer and product,
possibly extending product life and reducing general social waste. However, a lack
of conceptual clarity still plagues this fledgling field of emotional design (Desmet,
2002; Forlizzi, Disalvo and Hanington, 2003; Norman, 2004) and this will be
discussed further in Chapter 3.
Norman (2002) suggests that emotional human responses result from processing by
three different levels of the brain: the automatic, pre-wired layer, named “the visceral
level”; the level containing the brain’s processes controlling everyday behaviour,
known as “the behavioural level”; and the contemplative part of the brain, or “the
2
reflective level” (Norman, 2004). Each plays a different part in the overall
functioning of all human beings as each level is, in part, a reflection of it’s biological
origins in the brain. Norman (2004) states that visceral deign involves an automatic
evaluation, whereby consumers react to the visual and other sensory aspects of a
product. Within this, lies an anticipated pleasurable response sought by consumers in
all aspects of consumption (Jordan, 2000). This is where hedonic elements of the
consumer’s behaviour respond with the pursuit of pleasurable purchase experiences.
It is the designer’s role to cater to these sought out hedonic experiences by
communicating to the consumer through the physical manifestation of their design.
This process of product communication is also known as the study of product
rhetoric. The primary motivation for this study is the desire to fill the gap in
knowledge about visceral hedonic rhetoric and its role within the design of
interactive products. The focus on interactive products gives scope to the study due
to the nature of consumer-product interaction and the literature in the field of design
and emotion. There is evidence that research has been conducted on each of the
topics encompassing the scope of the research but never on their concurrence or
convergence.
The term “consumer” is used throughout this study for its specific reference to the
context of consumer purchasing decisions. It relates to the customer’s choice and
preference when first exposed to a range of products, before significant interaction
occurs or a purchase is made.
3
Figure 1: Conglomerate Research Gap
This study presents a novel investigation of visceral hedonic rhetoric, as depicted in
Figure 1. It encompasses a review of literature on each of the following categories:
visceral design, consumer hedonics and product rhetoric, all of which reside within
the context of emotional design research. The literature review identifies a gap in
knowledge at the convergence of these three areas and highlights the need to further
develop this new area of visceral hedonic rhetoric. In this context, this study defines
“visceral hedonic rhetoric” as the properties of a product that persuasively elicit the
pursuit of pleasure through an immediate instinctual level of cognition.
design and emotion
4
The research area of visceral hedonics is of vital importance to the design discipline
as it enables designers to instantly create powerful emotional connections between
consumers and products (Norman and Ortony, 2003; Wrigley, Popovic and
Chamorro-Koc, 2008). This requires investigating visceral hedonic rhetoric by
examining a variety of products and consumers’ hedonic visceral responses to these
products. This may assist in developing new design approaches, allowing product
designers to gain a better understanding of a product’s attributes.
1.2 Research Problem
Consumer desires and the drive to acquire consumer goods at an exorbitant rate
dictate the way of life in western society. This consumption has implications for
product design, manufacture and disposal. Of particular concern is the latter, with
waste being discarded at an alarming global speed. However, harnessing the potential
of positive consumer attachment through a product’s design has been studied by
many authorities (Cooper, 2000; Mugge, Schoormans and Schifferstein, 2005; Van
Hemel and Brezet, 1997; Schifferstein and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, 2008), and has been
proven to lead to the prolonged life of otherwise discarded products.
When a consumer becomes attached to a product they are more likely to handle it
with care, repair it when it breaks down and postpone its replacement as long as
possible (Schifferstein and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, 2008). Product attachment is
considered to provide a meaningful emotional product relationship to the consumer,
as well as promoting longer lasting product-consumer relationships as a means to
reducing resource waste (Mugge, Schoormans and Schifferstein, 2005). Encouraging
consumers to connect with their product emotionally and refrain from early,
unnecessary disposal may lead to waste reduction and less landfill each year.
Products need to cultivate a relationship in the mind of the consumer that is more
meaningful, less disposable and more enduring, in order to stand the test of time.
Schifferstein and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim (2008) state that there is a need to strengthen
the bond between consumer and their product through the design process.
5
Figure 2 illustrates a typical product lifecycle. The orange circles represent where
emotional design and product attachment can infiltrate and impact upon such a
lifecycle, possibly resulting in the prolonged lifespan of a product. By investigating
visceral hedonic rhetoric, an immediate emotional connection with the consumer can
be formed, thus strengthening the link between emotional design and product
attachment.
Figure 2: Product Lifecycle
1.3 Research Aim and Objectives
The aim of this research is to provide new knowledge so that products may be
designed to harness the full range of consumer visceral responses. The foundation for
this work is laid by discussing the scope, significance and limitations of currently
available research in the areas of emotion, visceral design, consumer hedonics and
product rhetoric. Greater insight into these areas may help designers to generate
immediate, strong emotional attachments between consumers and products.
The objectives of the research are to identify:
a) the visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in designed interactive products; and
b) the difference between visceral rhetoric and visceral hedonic rhetoric.
Design Conception Manufacture Point Of Sale Product
ConsumptionProduct Disposal
Emotional Design
Product Attachment
ProlongedLife
6
1.4 Research Questions
The main question this research set out to answer is:
• What visceral hedonic rhetoric is evident in the design of interactive
products?
This main research question is broken down into the following two sub-questions
that drive this study. These sub-questions are:
• What are the specific product properties that cause visceral hedonic
responses to designed interactive products?
• How does different visceral rhetoric in products affect hedonic responses?
1.5 Qualitative Research Approach
This study encompasses literature from a broad spectrum of fields, from which the
three areas of visceral design, consumer hedonics and product rhetoric were created.
Although combinations of two of these areas are covered in existing research, there
is not yet a study that encompasses all three and that is applied to the field of product
design. In order to integrate these research areas, this qualitative research project
consists of four stages:
• Stage 1: Literature review
• Stage 2: Data collection
• Stage 3: Data analysis and interpretation
• Stage 4: Conclusion and findings
Figure 3 details the four stages of this research and their milestones.
7
Figure 3: Research Stages
1.6 Thesis Structure
The literature review in Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5 illustrates the foci of this research:
emotions and the design dialogue, visceral design, consumer hedonics and product
rhetoric. It discusses relevant knowledge and authorities pertaining to each separate
area of literature and compares opinions and findings to create a foundation of
knowledge upon which to ground the study. Chapter 6 identifies the research gap of
visceral hedonic rhetoric and provides the direction for the study. It summarises the
main discoveries and highlights from all previous chapters and positions the study in
LiteratureReview
- Emotions
- Visceral Design
- Consumer Hedonics
- Product Rhetoric
Data Collection
- Pilot Study
- Screening Questionnaire
- Open-Ended Interview with Prompts
Data Analysisand Interpretation
- Coding Scheme
- Interpretation
- Results
Findings and Conclusions
- Findings
- Discussion
- Signi!cance and Contribution
- Future Work
8
a novel domain. Chapter 7 reviews the selection of interactive products and
methodologies in preparation for the research method. The chapter then details the
research design and methodology used in the study, focusing on three interactive
products (mobile telephones, mp3 players and USB memory flash drives). Chapter 8
then outlines the data analysis procedure and the research results, which consist of
the frequency of occurrence percentages of visceral and visceral hedonic responses.
Chapter 9 discusses the findings on visceral and visceral hedonic responses and the
relationships and concurrency between different responses that emerged. It positions
these findings in the context of the relevant literature. The study’s conclusions and
contribution to knowledge is outlined in Chapter 10. The conceptual visceral hedonic
rhetoric design tool is also presented here and future research possibilities are
discussed.
The primary field of emotional design demands a better understanding of consumer
product relationships, and this demand is driving the search for new knowledge in
this area. Research is needed to fully understand the potential of visceral hedonics
experienced by consumers at the point of initial interaction, which is determined by
the rhetoric of a product. Research into visceral hedonic rhetoric is vastly lacking, yet
it is critical in assisting designers’ awareness of the area of visceral design (Wrigley,
Popovic and Chamorro-Koc, 2008). Through identifying and exploring the gap in
this field of research, this thesis will allow product designers to anticipate and
appreciate the consumer response more thoroughly. The next chapter introduces
human emotions and the role they play in the field of design.
9
10
11
Chapter 2: Emotion and the Design Dialogue
Emotion informs human experience to the point where it is almost impossible to
distinguish or separate the emotional human experience from the events, actions or
decisions of personal histories and the present moment. In fact, psychological
studies have found that 80% of an individual’s life is consumed by emotion, while
the other 20% is controlled by intellect (Lough, 2006). Cognitive scientist Damasio
(1999) further finds that over 85% of thought, emotions and learning occur in the
subconscious mind, beyond the reach of rationalisation or reasoning: “The
pervasiveness of emotion in our development and subsequently in our everyday
experience connects virtually every object or situation in our experience” (Damasio,
1999, p.57).
2.1 Describing Emotions and Emotional Cognition
A somewhat vague concept, “emotion” has been used as a collective noun for all
kinds of affective phenomena. While many fields of research (psychology, cognitive
science, neurology, sociology, marketing, consumer research and design research)
have studied and attempted to quantify and define emotion and its mechanisms, the
resultant definitions remain, in some cases, contradictory and less than definitive.
Many medical researchers have defined emotions as natural phenomena that are
automatic and controlled by their biological mechanisms (Khalid, 2006; Khalid and
Helander, 2006). The medical definition traditionally sees emotion as an instinctive
response to external stimuli. Damasio (1999) states that emotion has the biological
function of regulating an organism’s internal state so that it can be prepared for a
specific reaction to suit a situation - particularly a dangerous situation. For example,
the “flight reaction” provides increased blood flow to the legs, facilitating the
requirement to run and escape. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging has
shown that emotions are produced in a fairly restricted ensemble of subcortical
12
regions located below the cerebral cortex. The main subcortical sites are in the brain
stem region, the hypothalamus and the basal forebrain. These sites are involved in
both regulating and representing body states, processing emotions to differing
degrees, and in the recognition of stimuli which prompt particular emotions
(Damasio, 1999). PET imaging has even shown correlations between the emotions
of sadness, anger, fear and happiness and distinctive patterns within these sites of the
brain. Emotions were thus traditionally considered by the medical fraternity to be a
biologically determined process; a complicated collection of chemical and neural
responses which form a pattern.
As early as 1986, Vygotsky argues that the relationship between emotion and
cognition is well documented but has largely been dismissed by cognitive
psychology. He argues that separating emotion from cognition is a major weakness
of psychology and cognitive science research (Vygotsky, 1986). Subsequent
developments in the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), neurosciences and
psychology have extended the influence of emotion from instinctive survival
mechanism to governing the greater gambit of human experience where an
individual’s reflexes, feelings, moods, cognition and behaviour are influenced by
human emotion. By 2003, Ellsworth and Scherer had found that emotional reactions
typically involve extensive cognition processing. Researchers have gathered a
substantial amount of experimental evidence about the sophisticated role of
emotional mechanism in high-level cognitive activities such as decision-making,
learning and creative problem solving (Schwarz, 2000; Fiedler and Bless, 2000).
While “cognition” is the scientific term for the process of thought (Neisser, 2009),
usage of the term varies in different disciplines: psychology and cognitive science
use “cognition” to refer to an information processing view of an individual’s
psychological functions; other interpretations link cognition to the study of all human
activity related to knowledge. These knowledge-related activities include attention,
creativity, memory, perception, problem solving, thinking and the use of language
(Neisser, 2009).
Many authorities (Damasio, 2003; Houghton, Calvert, Jackson, Cooper and
Whorwell, 2002; Norman, 2004; Picard, 2000; Suchman, 2004) have investigated
13
different approaches to cognitive interpretation of human behaviour and the role
emotions play in such tasks. Their studies firmly posit emotion as central to the
cognitive reasoning process. Using magnet resonance imaging (MRI), LeDoux
(1995 and 2000) ascertains that emotions and cognition are unified and contribute to
the control of thought and behaviour conjointly and equally. Minsky (2005) claims
that cognition contributes to the regulation of emotion, and agrees with LeDoux
(1995) that emotion and cognition should not be treated separately. Based in
software development and digital design, Oliveira and Sarmento (2003) investigate
the functional role of emotion to create new “agent architectures” or simulated
worlds within which agents or users explore real world scenarios, make emotional
evaluations, act and operate in real time environments. By taking what has been
learned in psychology and neurosciences, Oliveira and Sarmento depart from an
established base. They correlate emotional phenomena with high-level cognitive
capabilities and skills to show emotional mechanisms working as dedicated
information collectors that filter relevant data from multiple sources and develop
from a long evolutionary path to serve clear functional purposes in the wider view of
cognition (Oliveira and Sarmento, 2003). Following similar studies into computer-
human interfaces and software interaction design, Brave and Nass (2002) and Russell
(2003) concur that emotions are considered to be deployed when an individual feels
the desire to listen, perceive, imagine, judge, retrieve memory and employ mental
stimulation. Emotions are then seen as a fundamental link in a much wider chain of
cognition.
Coming from a similar background of human-computer interface research and
psychology, Matthews (2005) argues that “the concept of emotion is notoriously
overinclusive” when considered to encompass motivation, cognition, behaviour and
physiology. He claims that when used in this way, the term becomes no more than a
“vague umbrella term” and cites an example of different modes in which a driver
operates a car. Matthews (2005) claims that some driving operations may be
performed in an attentive but emotionally disengaged state (perhaps gauging braking
distance before reaching a corner), while other driving activities – such as interaction
with other motorists – use emotional states of anger or anxiety (Matthews, 2005).
14
Norman (2004) is a strong advocate of emotion being a key component of cognition
and the experience of the psychological objects around us. Massey (2002) further
articulates the limited range of rationality compared to ubiquitous emotion as
follows:
“Because of our evolutionary history and cognitive structure, it is generally
the case that unconscious emotional thoughts will proceed and strongly
influence our rational decisions. Thus, our much-valued rationality is really
more tenuous than we humans like to believe, and it probably plays a smaller
role in human affairs than prevailing theories of rational choice would have
it.” (Massey, 2002, p.25)
Norman’s stance – and that of Oliveira and Sarmento; Damasio; Houghton, Calvert,
Jackson, Cooper and Whorwell; Picard; Suchman; Minsky; and LeDoux – opposes
this division of emotional influence and general activity or operation by locating
emotion as key and integral to the process of interaction with the physical world,
processing of sensory data and consequent decision-making. Norman (2004) goes so
far as to ask why washing and polishing your car seems to make it drive better, and
explores why attractive objects provide the sometimes illusory, sometimes real,
effect of superior function. Review of the body of research on the topic reveals a
general consensus that an individual reacts to the world through his or her emotions,
and that stimuli such as arousal, action tendency and subjective feeling (pleasant or
unpleasant) evoke emotions in all individuals (Weerdesteijn, Desmet and Gielen,
2005).
If one now accepts emotion as central to the cognitive-reasoning process, the
question arises: how does emotional cognition differ from rational cognition or
rational thought? As Damasio discusses (1994), reason and logic – or intelligent
thinking – are not separate from emotion but are an indelible part of every thought
that is processed. Khalid (2006) similarly claims that emotions are not a cause of
irrational thinking; rather, they can motivate a passionate concern for objectivity:
“Rational thinking entails feelings, and effective thinking entails cognition” (Khalid,
2006). Khalid further draws on Minsky who claims that “our traditional idea is that
there is something called `thinking’ and that it is contaminated, modulated or
15
affected by emotions” (Minsky, 2005). No longer a contaminant, emotions are
revealed as aligned with rationality and integral to rational thought, as part of a
cognitive process that is “more precise, comprehensive and insightful than irrational
thinking” (Khalid, 2006).
Calne (2000) draws a distinction between emotion and reason in that emotion leads
to action, while reason leads to conclusions. Norman further defines the realm of
emotional cognition as the level of cognitive thoughts that deal with emotive
responses (2004). Thus, emotional cognition may be thought to be a reasoned and
rational processing of day-to-day stimulus, experience, information and knowledge
which encompasses or allows decision-making, action or response. What Calne
refers to as “reason” could be distinguished from emotional cognition as “abstract
thought”: a disengagement from one’s environment to philosophise or contemplate in
the absence of emotion and the senses. As Lough (2006) points out while examining
emotional responses to language, how a person thinks can be altered; however, how a
person feels is something deep, strong and personal. Individuals may meet or agree
over abstract thought or theory in an atmosphere removed from the individual’s
grounding in the real or physical world; however, emotional cognition is an
inherently subjective level of processing leading to action or response.
2.2 Emotional Consumers and Designing for Their Needs
As previously discussed, emotions are implicated in all aspects of daily life including
moods, cognition, behaviour, attention, perception and memory – to name a few
(Russell, 2003). Thus, they influence and affect aspects of everyday activities and
interactions between people, the environment, and products and artefacts that
surround them. O’Shaughnessy and O’Shaughnessy (2003) argue that emotions will
always be a factor in consumer decision-making and that consumers constantly make
decisions surrounding the selection, consumption and disposal of products.
Marketing success lies in consumers being provided with sought after emotional
states and minimising non-desired emotional states (Babin, Darden and Babin, 1998).
Emotions have, therefore, long been established as a field of research in the area of
16
marketing. However, many of the investigations have employed theories of emotion
from the field of psychology. Relying heavily on another discipline, they have thus
not incorporated area-specific marketing-field characteristics to further these theories
(Huang, 2001). Luce, Bettman and Payne (2001), for example, believe that the
research area of emotional effects on purchase choices is a very important and
understudied area of research. Much of the research conducted in the area of
emotional consumption lies within the disciplines of advertising, marketing and,
more specifically, branding (Mizerski and White, 1986). O’Shaughnessy and
O’Shaughnessy (2003) investigate the significance of emotion in marketing and
consumer experience by looking at emotional brands and consumer values and
beliefs. They do so by analysing these aspects through advertisements and marketing
campaigns, distinguishing emotion from product consumption and, more specifically,
product design.
Consumers’ emotions have a significant influence on purchase and consumption
decisions for a wide variety of products (Mizerski and White, 1986), with emotional
needs acting as a foundation for consumers making purchase decisions. Appealing to
a prospective customer emotionally is the key action leading to the purchase of a
product; therefore, decision-making is of focal interest in consumer behaviour
research. Weinberg and Gottwald (1982) have linked compulsive consumer buying
to the result of emotional state. However, impulsive buying is not the only field of
consumer purchasing in which emotions are involved. Through a study analysing
general food-related purchases and participation in recreational activities (such as
rock climbing and kayaking), Hirschman and Stern (1999) propose a direct influence
of emotion on a variety of cognitive responses and, hence, on a broad array of
consumption behaviours. Emotions influence information processing, mediate
responses to persuasive appeals, regulate the effects of marketing stimuli and initiate
goal setting. Luce, Bettman and Payne (2001) promote the importance of future
work in the area of emotional consumption and the implications emotional design
may have for better meeting consumers’ needs or desires.
17
2.3 The Design Dialogue
Unless a product is custom-made, a product’s consumer and designer generally only
have access to each other via the product with which they each interact. A designer
or design team in some cases, generates ideas and makes decisions about a product’s
form and the message its aesthetics should convey in isolation from consumer
feedback. Conversely, a consumer interprets the attributes of a product through their
interaction with the product, through their experience with similar products, and
within the particular environment in which the consumer-product meeting takes
place.
Monö (1997) applies Shannon’s (1948) basic model of communication to the study
of product design to create a useful framework within which to discuss and examine
the dialogue between design team and consumer. Within Monö’s model (1997), the
design team is the source of the communication. They transmit their message via the
physical attributes and characteristics of the product they design; thus, the product
becomes the transmitter of the design intent. The environment within which the
consumer and product interact becomes the channel of Shannon’s communication
model or the medium by which the message is transferred from Source to Receiver.
Attributes of the product are appraised by the consumer using sensory information;
thus, the consumer’s sensory perception can be considered to be the receiver of the
design message, much like a radio receives radio waves that are then converted into
sound. Continuing the analogy, interpretation of radio waves to produce sound can
be likened to the consumer’s faculty for response; to the ability to interpret sensory
information, to process and act in response to the product. Much like the production
of sound, the consumer’s faculty for response can be considered the destination of
Shannon’s communication model. Studies into consumer behaviour (Bloch, 1995;
O’Shaughnessy, 1992) further delineate such a response into “cognition” and
“affect” and a corresponding, and outwardly observable, “behaviour” or action. This
realignment of Shannon’s communication model with designer-consumer dialogue
can be represented, as shown in Figure 4.
18
Figure 4: Framework for design as a process of communication
(Modified from Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004; Bloch, 1995)
Gaver (1999) states that a relationship can be created with the consumer when
products elicit, communicate and share emotions. Emotional design deals with how
a designer elicits emotions through the manipulation of the sensory qualities that a
product has to offer a consumer (Jacobs, 1999). However, emotional satisfaction can
only be achieved if the product is designed in such a way as to collaborate with the
user in emotional experience. Gaver (2009) argues that, rather than singling out
emotion as an object of attention and working to explicitly recognize and represent it,
it is more fruitful to recognize emotion as an emergent aspect of experiences that are
multi-layered. Therefore, the concept of experience, where the subject and object
meet and merge, becomes a key issue in designing emotionally meaningful products
(Kurtgozu, 2002).
2.4 Emotional Cognition: The Three Levels
As previously defined in this chapter, emotional cognition may be thought to be an
inherently subjective but rational processing of day-to-day sensory stimulus,
experience and learnt information, leading to action or response. Existing literature
on the topic of emotional cognition in response to design presents different
approaches to essentially comparable concepts. Norman (2004) proposes a three
level hierarchy to the process of cognition: (i) visceral, (ii) behavioural and (iii)
reflective. Earlier work involving Norman and peers Ortony and Russell (2003) also
proposes a three level model comprising the (i) reaction level, (ii) routine level and
(iii) reflection level among
Environment(Channel)
PRODUCER CONSUMER
Cognition A!ect Action
RESPONSE (Destination)DESIGN
TEAM(Source)
PRODUCT(Transmitter)
SENSES(Receiver)
19
which information flows. Comparative tri-level systems have also been proposed by
Crozier (1994), Cupchik (1999), Lewalski (1988) and Baxter (1995). Drawing on
Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson’s (2004) unification of existing works on cognitive
levels, the following categorisation of these varying three-level systems link each
corresponding level with Norman’s 2004 terminology as the most inclusive and most
commonly accepted language available:
The Visceral Level
The visceral level responds to sensory perception or immediate impact. It is
fast; it makes rapid judgements of what is good or bad, safe or dangerous,
attractive or unattractive; and it sends signals to the muscles in the body to
react and alert the rest of the brain (Norman, 2004). This concept is related to
Lewalski’s visual “X-values” which express “the order of visual forms”
(1988), Crozier’s “response to form” (1994), Baxter’s “intrinsic
attractiveness” (1995) and Cupchik’s “sensory/aesthetic response” (1999).
These rapid judgements are biologically determined and can be inhibited or
enhanced by the environment within which they are perceived and by the
influence of other levels in the cognitive process.
The Behavioural Level
The behavioural level interprets the available sensory data to discern or make
judgements about an object’s function, mode-of-use or qualities. Norman’s
(2004) behavioural level corresponds to Lewalski’s visual “Y-values” which
are “conducive to purposefulness and functionality” (1988), Crozier’s
“response to function” (1994), Baxter’s “semantic attractiveness” (1995) and
Cupchik’s “cognitive/behavioural response” (1999). Its action can be
enhanced or inhibited by the reflective layer and, in turn, it can enhance or
inhibit the visceral layer.
The Reflective Level
The most developed of the levels is that of reflective thought. Norman sees
this level as “about one’s thoughts afterwards, how [an object or product]
20
makes one feel, the image it portrays, the message it conveys” (2004).
Norman’s reflective level may be aligned with Lewalski’s visual “Z-values”
which “fulfil the need to belong and [need] for self esteem” (1988), Crozier’s
“response to meaning” (1994), Baxter’s “symbolic attractiveness” (1995) and
Cupchik’s “personal/symbolic response” (1999). Note that the reflective level
does not have direct access either to sensory input or the control of behaviour.
Instead, it watches over, reflects upon, and tries to bias the behavioural level
(Norman and Ortony, 2003). Consumers use reflection to integrate their
experiences with designed artefacts into broader life experiences and, over
time, associate meaning and value with the artefacts themselves (Norman,
2004).
These elements of response or emotional cognition are not presented as objective
qualities of a product or object. Rather, they are a cognitive interpretation of an
object’s qualities driven both by the perception of tangible stimuli and by pre-
existing knowledge. The brain responds to objects using both emotion and facts
recalled from memory and emotion. Due to the bioregulatory dispositional
knowledge available in the diencephalon and the brain stem, the brain will respond to
a particular object while discarding other information (Damasio, 1999). This
response will affect facial muscles and the musculo-skeletal frame, the viscera, the
internal milieu, as well as neurochemical responses in the brain itself, and is part of
the way in which the state of the body is modified by emotions (Damasio, 2001).
Thus, the three aspects or levels of cognition “do not operate independently, but are
highly inter-related; each one influences the others” (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson,
2004, p.564).
The symbiotic nature of the three cognitive levels may be demonstrated as follows:
the perceived functionality of a product (Behavioural) may inform one’s assessment
of the elegance or aestheticism (Visceral) of a product, as well as the social value or
self-expression (Reflective) connoted by the product. Symptomatic of this
intertwined relationship is the difficulty theorists have found in defining each aspect.
As Crilly (2004) points out, Monö’s (1997) semantic function of expression and
Coates’ (2003) aesthetic principle of daimon (or character) overlap considerably;
21
however, Monö’s semantic function would belong in the Behavioural category and
Coates’ daimon in the Visceral. Similarly, the relative importance a consumer places
on the attributes of a product may influence the extent of interaction between the
cognitive levels. For example, a teenage consumer highly influenced by their peers’
approval may preference a product’s colour or shape because of its ability to reflect
fashionability or trendiness over the product’s functionality.
2.5 Affect
As previously discussed, the interaction between consumers and products elicits an
emotional response in the consumer. Demirbilek and Sener (2003) describe “affect”
as part of the “consumer’s psychological response” to the sensory attributes or design
message of a product. Desmet’s work (2002, 2003) illustrates that consumers may
experience a variety of emotions, and potentially contradictory emotions, in response
to a product. These emotions may include intrigue, disappointment, satisfaction or
amusement. However, they typically can be confined to a limited selection of
possible human emotional experience and, being directed at a product, can generally
be categorised as on the less extreme end of the emotional scale. Bagozzi, Gopinath
and Nyer (1999) earlier define “affect” as an umbrella term for a more specific set of
mental processes including emotion, moods and attitudes. In other words, they
considered affect as a general category for mental feeling processes.
As part of the consumer’s emotional response to a product, each affect results from
an appraisal of a product and is based on the visceral, behavioural and reflective
components of emotional cognition. Although affect and cognition are to some
degree neuroanatomically distinct systems, they are also deeply intertwined
(Norman, Ortony and Russell, 2003). Processing at each level serves two different
functions: evaluation or judgement of the world and things happening in it (affect);
and the interpretation of what is happening in the world (cognition). Coates (2003),
Norman (2002) and Ashby, Isen and Turken (1999) agree that each system
influences the other, with cognition leading to affect, and affect influencing
cognition.
22
2.6 Action
O’Shaughnessy (1992) and Bloch (1995) observe the way in which a consumer’s
psychological response (comprised of cognition and affect) influences the way the
consumer behaves towards a product. The terms “approach” and “avoid” are
frequently used by marketers to categorise the behavioural responses of an interested
or disinterested consumer (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004). Approach
responses are those prompting a longer association with a product: generation of
sufficient interest to further investigate a product; product purchase; product use or
increased frequency of product use; and prolonged product life. Avoidance responses
are those curtailing or reducing association with a product: ignoring a product;
failure to purchase; product abuse; reduced use of a product; product disposal; or
(even) hiding the product (Bloch, 1995).
2.7 A Framework for the Design Dialogue
Veryzer’s 1993 journal article comments that progress in developing an
understanding of consumer response to product design has been greatly impeded by
the lack of a conceptual framework. Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson’s (2004) model of
the components of the design dialogue and a consumer’s emotional response draws
together disparate and wide-ranging works on the topic. It unifies concepts from
psychology, marketing, engineering, computer science, design and fine art to present
a cohesive model within which to understand and further explore the consumer-
product relationship.
Figure 5 draws heavily on Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson’s (2004) representation, but
departs in the use of Norman’s 2004 terminology. Norman’s terms for the levels of
cognition are preferred herein over those used by Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, as
the direction of this study will delve further into the area of the visceral; into gut
reactions and their effect on consumer-product relationships. Crilly, Moultrie and
Clarkson (2004) use the alternative term “aesthetic impression”, as it relies more
heavily on the purely visual realm of sensory perception, while this study aims to
include investigation of other forms of sensory information. Indeed, Crilly, Moultrie
and Clarkson (2004, p.549) identify the “confusing and inconsistent” use of the term
23
“aesthetic” and its varying uses in different fields. “Visceral” presents a more
inclusive terminology as it is widely used in general psychological and medical
findings as well as in discussion of fine art and design and refers to the wider range
of corporeal human sensory systems. Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson’s (2004)
representation, albeit with minor modifications specific to this study, evolves from
Shannon and Monö’s model of communication between designer and consumer to
encompass and define each aspect of the design dialogue: from the design team and
conceptualisation of a product; to the interaction between the consumer and product;
to the consumer’s consequential cognitive interpretation and affect or judgement of a
product’s attributes; and, finally, to the consumer’s responsive action towards or
away from the product.
It is also worth noting that whilst the design dialogue shows a division between the
cognitive and affective phases presented in the framework, this division is merely a
standard pictorial representation, and considerable interdependence exists between
the two phases of emotional response (as discussed earlier). Similarly, the symbiotic
relationship or interactions between the three levels of cognition are highlighted by
the use of double-headed, circular arrows connecting each aspect, as illustrated
below.
24
Figure 5: The Design Dialogue Framework
(Synthesized from Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004; Norman, 2004)
2.7.1 The Context of Consumption
When a consumer responds to a product, their culture, background and experiences
have influence over their response (Bloch, 1995; Coates, 2003; Monö, 1997). As the
designers and consumers of a particular product are rarely the same, and the two are
usually separated by time and place, the context of consumption inside which the
consumer behaves is of significant consequence. No guarantee exists that a
designer’s interpretation resembles a consumer’s understanding. Within Figure 5, the
consumer’s context is depicted as encompassing the environment within which the
consumer and product interact, and all aspects of the consumer’s interpretation of
and response to that process of consumer-product interaction. It is within this context
that the design of a product is interpreted by the consumer and where external
influences impact on this interpretation.
CONTEXT OF CONSUMPTION
PRODUCER CONSUMER
RESPONSE
VISUAL REFERENCES
DESIGN TEAM
PRODUCT SENSES
VISCERALPhysicality
BEHAVIOURALE!ectiveness of use
REFLECTIVESelf - image
Personal satisfaction
ENVIRONMENTAL DISTRACTIONSBackground
Viewing time
Environment
GeometryDimensions
TexturesMaterialsColours
GraphicsDetails
Vision(Touch)(Taste)(Smell)
(Hearing)
Stereotypes Similar products Analogy Characters Conventions Cliches
Emotional Cognition A!ect Action
ORGANISATIONISSUES
CommunicationResources
Brand style
PRODUCTIONQUALITYTolerances
FinishAgeing
SENSORYCAPABILITIES
Visual acuityRange-of-vision
Colour vision
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICSAge, GenderExperiencePersonality
CULTURAL INFLUENCESTastesTrends
FashionsStyles
CIRCUMSTANTIAL FACTORSMotivation
OpportunityMarketing
Social setting
ApproachAvoid
25
2.7.2 Influences and Interferences in the Design Dialogue
The complexity and the variety of human experience are often neglected by design
theory (Burns, 2000). However, it is vital for anyone who works in the design field to
recognise, listen and respond to what people experience (Burns, 2000). Emotions are
a biologically and experientially determined process and, although rough
correspondence can be made between a class of emotion inducer and the resulting
emotion, the composition and dynamics of the emotional responses vary from person
to person. An individual’s stage of development, knowledge, environment and
culture are just some of the influencing factors that alter the expression of emotions
and their meaning. These influences shape what constitutes an adequate inducer of a
particular emotion, some aspects of the expression of the emotion, as well as the
cognition and the behaviour which follow the emotional expression.
Influences on the Design Team and Message
A variety of needs are fulfilled by consumer products. Products satisfy many
functional requirements and do not exist primarily to perform tasks. These functional
requirements incorporate the fulfilment of aspirations and cultural, social and
emotional needs. The relationship between a product and its consumer has created a
great amount of interest; every object is significant in its own way to each individual
through different memories and experiences (McDonagh-Philp and Lebbon, 1999).
Thus, a designer must develop their designs to meet and empathise with the specific
user group targeted by the product and its design message. In general, a designer
works in a space that is constrained by a number of outside variables such as cost,
time to market, brand identity or style, internal organisational communication issues,
resources and so on. All of these influences moderate the effectiveness of the
consequent design in transmitting its intended message. For example, a designer
given a brief involving a limited time to market to meet a recently emergent niche
may be required to trade-off on the amount of time spent resolving the final design.
Consequently, the appearance of the product may not be as appealing to its
consumers as anticipated. Similarly, budget limitations may reduce the achievable
quality and finish of the materials used.
26
Influences on Production Quality
Information is lacking on why and how emotional reactions are elicited by various
product designs and how individuals respond to these products. Trying to find
relationships between design features and emotional responses is quite difficult.
Within these design features, the production quality of the product can impact greatly
on a consumer’s response. Manufacturing and construction standards such as
tolerances, finishes and aging can influence the way in which the product is
perceived by the consumer. For example, inaccurate tolerances may result in a less
functional assembly, and poor surface finishes may create the appearance of an
inferior or faulty product when the intended design message was one of luxury and
high quality.
Influences on Sensory Capabilities
The senses and the information they allow the consumer to receive are moderated by
any impairments to the consumer’s sensory perception caused by the manner in
which the product is presented, as well as by distractions that detract from that
overall presentation. Sensory capabilities such as colour-vision, range of vision and
visual acuity all are of particular interest when considering the visual domain in
design. For example, observation by people who are colour blind will result in
products being perceived in a way other than that anticipated by the designer.
Norman (2004) argues that, like cognition, emotion is an internal, thoroughly
individual phenomenon. When two different people feel different things for the same
event, it is called a subjective and personal emotion (Gomez, Popovic and Bucolo,
2008).
Environmental Distractions
The environment the product is viewed in will have considerable impact upon the
transmitted design message, which could possibly be received in an unexpected way.
Influencing factors comprise of the background setting and the allowable viewing
time of the product. For example, if the product’s backdrop or environment is too
distracting, the consumer will not be focusing fully on the product and may not
receive the complete design message. Similarly, the time available to view a product
within its environment will determine the amount of information the consumer
27
receives. The full details of a design may not be perceived instantaneously; the
consumer may take time to explore them (Moles, 1996).
Personal Characteristics
Consumer research studies ascertain that a consumer’s personal characteristics such
as age, gender, experience and personality have a great influence over a person’s
preferences for certain design attributes. The individual differences between
consumers result not only in variations in the preferences they express, but also in
variations in the importance of those preferences. For example, some people place
more value on the appearance of products than others.
Cultural Influences
A consumer’s response is also heavily moderated by cultural influences. In
particular, cultural preconceptions contribute to how a design is interpreted and to
what extent it is accepted by the consumer. In spite of the infinite variations to be
found across cultures, among individuals and over the course of a life span, it can be
predicted with some success that particular stimuli will produce certain emotions
(Damasio, 1999). This can become even more complicated if the designer and
consumer are from differing cultures, with consumers’ responses becoming difficult
to anticipate.
Circumstantial Factors
A consumer’s personal situation at the time of viewing a product has the potential to
influence their response. For example, the financial situation of the consumer may
dictate the price range of products they will consider and whether a product may or
may not be purchased. A consumer’s emotional state can influence various aspects of
information processing, including: coding and retrieval of information; the strategies
used to process information; evaluations and judgements; and creative thinking. All
of these aspects have been the subject of marketing studies in an effort to better
understand customers (Bagozzi, Gopinath and Nyer, 1999).
28
The Influence of Visual References
The visual references from which the consumer may draw conclusions are defined by
their prior personal experiences and are based upon sources external to the product.
Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) state that these visual references aid the
consumer’s understanding by “reflecting generic designs, alluding to other concepts
or evoking comparison with living things” (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004,
p.565). Semantic interpretations may be reinforced by allowing the consumers to
classify the product with ease, comparing it to products or concepts with which they
are already familiar (McCoy, 1984). Visual references may also influence the
symbolic associations a product elicits by consolidating it with other objects that are
already seen to hold some social value (Postrel, 2003).
Visual comparisons can be derived from the product itself and from the consumer’s
stereotypes of the product classification. Additionally, products can be equated to
similar products that exist within the same product type. Besides this, a product may
also be seen to make reference to other products, objects and styles to promote
certain design intents. These references are characterised by Crilly, Moultrie and
Clarkson (2004) as metaphors, characters, conventions and clichés. Visual references
are presented in the framework within the context of consumption influencing
consumer responses (Figure 5).
2.8 Summary
The term “emotion” has long been used as a somewhat vague collective noun to
describe a wide range of affective phenomena considered to be irrational and
external to rational decision-making. However, research conducted on emotion in the
fields of medicine, psychology, computer science and product design have firmly
posited emotion as central to the cognitive reasoning process. Additionally, the
research deems that emotion is an integral and inescapable part of everyday life,
involving the individual’s engagement with the physical world. As key to an
individual’s rational processing of day-to-day stimulus, a consumer’s emotions have
a significant impact on purchase and consumption decisions.
29
Consumers and designers operate in different spheres. The consumer must evaluate
and interpret a product’s beauty, function and message through interaction with its
physicality, their experience with similar products, and within the environment of the
consumer-product meeting. A designer may only communicate their intended design
message via a product’s physical manifestation. Monö (1997) applies earlier models
of basic communication to the dialogue between designer and consumer, upon which
Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) based their theoretical framework.
Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) further expand Monö’s (1997) reinterpretation
to create a framework of this design dialogue. This framework encompasses:
transmission of the design team’s message through the product; consumer and
product interaction within an immediate environment; the consumer’s receipt or
interpretation of the product and its design message towards an emotional response;
and the moderating influences that operate within the context of the consumption
process. In creating this framework, Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) draw
together disparate and wide-ranging works on the topic of emotional cognition, affect
and consumer behaviour or action which together comprise a consumer’s emotional
response.
Emotional cognition is defined as an inherently subjective but rational processing of
an object’s perceived qualities mediated by the consumer’s pre-existing knowledge.
Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) unify several theories involving comparative
tri-level systems, to present a cohesive concept of the three levels of cognition. This
study has favoured Norman’s (2004) terminology for these levels – “visceral”,
“behavioural” and “reflective” – because of the more inclusive “visceral” designation
which refers to the wider range of corporeal human sensory systems rather than the
purely visual. This research will delve further into the area of the visceral and its
effect on consumer-product relationships.
As highlighted by Veryzer’s 1993 article, progress in developing an understanding of
consumer response to product design has been greatly impeded by the lack of
understanding within which to discuss and begin to understand the consumer-product
relationship. This much needed framework is delivered by Crilly, Moultrie and
30
Clarkson’s (2004) work and modified herein to incorporate specific terminology
relevant to this study. It is the research pertaining to visceral hedonic rhetoric that
departs from these previous studies in order to further the understanding of emotional
consumer responses to product design. The visceral level of emotional cognition is
discussed further in the following chapter.
31
32
33
Chapter: 3 Visceral Design
Visceral response is the cognitive processing of immediate responses by which the
user reacts to the visual and other sensory aspects of a product. However, it has also
been described as the level of emotional cognition that deals with the appearance of
the product that is instantaneously assessed as good or bad. An example of this
immediate reaction is a person’s judgement of a book by its cover: loving or hating a
product at first sight. Consequent visceral response also encompasses the conditions
of our surroundings that combine to produce positive or negative effects. For
example, the soothing music in a hotel lobby may promote a positive environment
for consumer-product interaction. Visceral design is significant to this study as it
discusses the initial impact that a product makes on a consumer.
3.1 The Missing Link in Emotional Design
All products elicit some kind of emotional response from the consumer whether it is
good, bad, intentional or unintentional. Designers create products to elicit certain
emotions from consumers when they purchase, interact with and experience a variety
of products (Desmet, 2002; Solovyova, 2003). The emotional power of products has
never been doubted as a consumer’s purchase decisions are heavily influenced by his
or her emotions. It is these decisions that are based on emotional tradeoffs of product
attributes (such as safety or price) against aesthetic or status appeal (Luce, Bettman
and Payne, 2001). Marketing efforts often appear to utilise this potential for
emotional tradeoffs by increasing the emotional strength of associated product
advertising with the relevant consumer decision.
Emotions play a major role in the marketing and advertising of products and this role
is widely recognised in these research fields. Marketers have tended to take an
empirical approach to the measurement of emotions and to rely upon self-reports
(such as questionnaires), which constitute the most frequently used procedure in this
34
field of research. Despite previous works and research, Bagozzi, Gopinath and Nyer
(1999) claim that authorities are only beginning to understand the role of emotions in
the field of marketing and the possibilities available through exploitation of
emotions. While Hirschman and Stern (1999) realize the influence of emotional
cognition in response and consumption behaviours, studies into interactive consumer
products and their relationship with emotions have not been specifically undertaken.
The importance of emotions and their pivotal role in product response are largely
forgotten by the design community, while emotions affecting consumer preferences
are deemed extremely important by other research fields such as marketing and
advertising (Kurvinen, 2001).
Norman (2002) states that skilled designers have understood the powerful appeal of
emotions and have used their intuitions and artistic skills to exploit this appeal to
date. However, Norman (2002) agrees with Forlizzi, Disalvo and Hanington’s (2003)
view that when designers think about emotion during the creation of a new product,
they lack a shared understanding of the concept. Thus, the need for a unified
knowledge base to aid design practices in emotional design and tools to evaluate a
product’s emotional impact is pressing. More specifically, the need to examine
emotional experiences and their implications for product design becomes evident as
no contributable cause of a consumer’s emotional experience can yet be identified.
Similarly, the need to examine product attributes in an emotional context becomes
paramount (Forlizzi, Disalvo and Hanington, 2003).
An emotional design occurs when a consumer emotionally distinguishes a product
from others that contain similar characteristics. A consumer will handle and touch a
product if they sense that it will feel good in their hand. The product will then affirm
the person’s expectations if it does feel good (Sawhney and Huntting, 2007;
Wensveen, Overbeeke and Djajadiningrat, 2000). The fact that consumers will
always attribute emotions to products, even when they are not pleasant, is a major
claim of designers. According to Overbeeke and Hekkert (1999), the purpose of
understanding the area of design and emotion is to aid and help designers in creating
emotionally valuable products. Thus, their aim is to develop various research-based
tools and methods to create a solid consumer-product relationship (Beaver, 2010).
35
A specific emotional response cannot be caused by an expressive object’s material,
shape or colour alone (Forlizzi, Disalvo and Hanington, 2003). Only when an item’s
characteristics come together and act as a medium for an emotion, does an object
becomes expressive. As people become more sensitive to dimensions of products
that go beyond traditional aspects of usability, the need to understand emotion and
experience, and their implications for product design, increases. Some products may
create new and compelling experiences, while others may evoke strong memories of
the past. A wide array of emotional experiences ranging from pleasant to unpleasant,
fragile to sturdy, or simple to complex, are elicited by certain products (Forlizzi,
Gemperle and Disalvo, 2003). Forlizzi, Mutlu and Disalvo (2001) aim to understand
how emotional experiences impinge upon the interpretation of an object’s colour,
shape, size, material, aesthetics and functionality. Yet, there is still little information
about how emotional reactions are triggered by design characteristics and which
aspects cause defined reactions (Desmet, 2002; Desmet and Hekkert, 2002). Despite
recognition that emotions play an important role in designers’ development, and in
the generation, production, purchase and final use of products with which they
surround themselves (McDonagh, Hekkert, Erp and Gyi, 2001), Westwood (2005)
still insists that there are many more questions than answers in published works
regarding the aims of emotional design (Westwood, 2005).
The colouring of products plays an important role for consumers in making decisions
on what they like or dislike. It evokes different emotions such as excitement, energy
and calm (Ou and Luo, 2004). Studies in the field of psychology have established
that colour has a strong emotional value when it comes to marketing and consumer
choices (D’Andrade and Egan, 1974). Gorn, Chattapadhyay, Yi and Dahl (1997)
investigate print advertisements and the emotional link between the hue, chroma and
value of the colour and a consumer’s feelings and attitudes. It was found that higher
levels of chroma elicit greater feelings of excitement; this, in turn, increases likability
(Gorn, Chattapadhyay, Yi and Dahl, 1997).
Emotions are all pervasive, influencing all human interactions in the physical world,
both consciously and (often) unconsciously (Norman, 2004). Emotions also indicate
36
how favourable the environment is for the individual, given their current capabilities
and goals. It is emotions which, therefore, encourage the adoption of new, or
reappropriation of old, goals. They can measure how well an individual is succeeding
in the environment or, alternatively, how favourable that environment is, given its
current goals and capabilities. Emotions may be regarded as evaluation mechanisms.
This evaluation may then motivate the adoption of new or reprioritized goals
(Oliveira and Sarmento, 2003).
Greiman (1990) proposes that design should seduce, shape and, perhaps more
importantly, evoke an emotional response from the consumer. Yet it is only recently
that emotions within the consumer-product relationship have been explored. In 1999,
the Delft University of Technology organised the first ever Design and Emotion
conference, while in the process facilitating growth in this new area of interest. This
conference has been running for over a decade now, thus expanding the interest in
this field of research internationally.
Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer, Ramlingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman
(2008) look at the three levels of emotional cognition while investigating the ways in
which design influences people’s emotional experiences. These researchers claim
that a given emotional response to an interactive design feature is not entirely
predictable; however, they also claim that the various emotional responses to a given
product quality are not completely random either. They show that each of the three
levels of cognition originally proposed by Norman (2004) is affected by different
product qualities or attributes such as colour, size or function.
Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer, Ramlingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman’s
(2008) study involved twelve participants and used the methods of interviewing and
picture-journaling to explore response to interactive products. The participants were
asked to take photos of ten interactive products that they owned or had frequently
used, and either liked or disliked. The participants were then interviewed after the
photos were developed and questioned about which interactive product qualities they
associated with the emotional value they had assigned the product. The researchers
then separated the responses into the three levels of cognition: (i) visceral, (ii)
37
behavioural and (iii) reflective. The results of the study show that interactive product
qualities are an important source of emotional experiences and do not randomly
affect emotional experience; rather, direct correlations exist between certain qualities
and certain emotional responses. Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer,
Ramlingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman’s study (2008) also demonstrates that
Norman’s (2004) three levels of cognition are influenced by different types of
interactive product qualities. As Norman (2004) discusses in his book Emotional
Design, the three levels of cognition translate into three different kinds of design: (i)
visceral design which refers primarily to that initial impact of a product’s
appearance; (ii) behavioural design which refers to the look, feel and total user
experience of a product; and (iii) reflection which concerns the image of the
consumer a product portrays to others and to the consumer themselves (Norman,
2004).
Candi (2005) agrees with Norman’s (2004) definition of the three levels of cognition
and develops this theory to apply to the area of innovation as a fruitful means by
which to improve business performance. Candi (2007) concludes that a synthesis
approach to innovation encompassing all three levels of cognition is needed in both
services and manufacturing. No significant disparity in design emphasis and focus
across the range of business conduct is shown in Candi’s data. Among the
manufacturing and service firms studied, there is a variation in design emphasis, with
a tendency to focus on the behavioural or functional areas of design such as user
interfaces, tangible artefacts, documents, usability, service process, communication
process, customer experience and marketing (Candi, 2007). This emphasises the
specific areas of employment of design within firms. However, the approach is very
much user-centred, focusing on the behavioural level of staff and customers, and
does not fully utilise responses originating from the other two levels - visceral and
reflective - within company structure.
Behavioural design focuses on a product’s utility, considering practical qualities such
as function, performance, efficiency and ergonomics (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson,
2004). The consumer’s subsequent behavioural evaluation of a product allows for
interpretation of such functional associations. To better equip designers to design for
38
the behavioural level of cognition, Butter (1989) suggested a variety of activities that
integrate semantic considerations into the design process. These activities are:
establishing the overall semantic character the product aims to communicate;
identifying product attributes enabling the communication; and creating a
perceivable appearance capable of projecting the required characteristics through the
use of shape, material, texture and colour (Butter, 1989). This approach to the design
process has been proven by industry which has produced successful products with
precise attention given to the behavioural level of cognition (Langrish and Lin, 1992;
Blaich, 1989). As well as Butter (1989), Norman (2004) and Monö (1997) also
suggest an empirical approach to behavioural characteristics in product design.
Therefore, a strong basis exists for designers looking to employ appropriate
behavioural characteristics in their product designs.
Designing for the reflective level, caters to a product’s socially determined symbolic
meaning (Levy, 1959; Mayall, 1979). Consequently, Haug (1996) suggests that
products evoke thoughts, feelings and associations a consumer may link to the
product, or that the consumer assumes may be projected into their own image. This
allows the consumer to communicate their identity and social status through a
desirable self-image (Dittmar, 1992). The meanings affiliated with products are often
determined by factors external to the product’s appearance (Haug, 1996), such as
social conventions and marketing agendas (Forty, 1986). Opperud (2002) suggests
that it is the designer’s duty to decipher the common social values and opinions held
within a consumer’s culture and to translate them into designs that manifest the
appropriate reflective meanings. This encourages the meaning of the product to be
contemplated and conceptualised at the beginning of the design process. Authorities
such as Julier (2000) and Baxter (1999) agree that tools for designers already exist to
aid in this early stage of the design process. For example, the already established and
practiced “mood board” or “persona board” is useful in obtaining and presenting the
habits, moods, attitudes, desires and ideas that are of interest to the targeted
consumer group.
Coates (2003) states that a person may view a product and find it attractive,
appealing, stylish or beautiful; usually, the activity of viewing the product is in itself
39
pleasurable. This hedonic visceral experience [or ‘aesthetic impression’ as Crilly,
Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) refer to it] has intrigued design researchers for decades
(Palmer, 1996; Pye, 1978), and art theorists and philosophers for centuries before
that (Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson, 1990; Crawford, 1974). However, while the
subject of beauty and aesthetics has been studied for centuries in relation (especially)
to fine art, there is still no consensus on what defines “beautiful” or what comprises a
“beautiful” product (Routio, 2002). Additionally, there has been minimal
contribution to the formulation of a coherent theory with respect to aesthetic aspects
of design (Veryzer, 1993). Thus, Baxter (1993) describes the natural attractiveness of
visual form as the most elusive and intangible quality of an object, reinforcing
Routio (2002) and Veryzer’s (1993) opinion as to why this issue may be so difficult
to express and define
Designers rely on their skills, education and experience to create products that induce
a positive visceral (aesthetic) impression. Designers’ implicit understanding of
perception and visual composition frequently leads their intuitive judgements (Liu,
2003). Similarly, there are authorities (Crozier, 1994) that argue that intuitive
creativity is all that is required for the production of a viscerally attractive product.
This is supported by the fact that very few quantitative or qualitative investigations
have lead to output that is useful to practitioners or design students (Crozier, 1994).
Indeed, designers and consumers may have different opinions on what is attractive in
product design. This is why measuring consumer responses to products and their
correlating perceptions of product attributes may offer the opportunity to prove
Crozier (1994) wrong and produce a useful output to aid practitioners and design
students when designing for the visceral.
3.2 Describing the Visceral
In 2001 Givechi and Velazquez vocalised that many authorities have tried to define
the term “visceral”, as the word is used in many different contexts and on a broad
scale. Traditionally, it has been described as pertaining to instinct rather than
intellect, that is, a visceral reaction (Fowler, 1991). This agrees with Pennebaker
40
(1995) who proclaims the “visceral” to be instinctual reactions of survival that are
regulated by the brain and are the most basic levels of cognition (Pennebaker, 1995).
Although the visceral level is the simplest and most primitive part of the brain, it is
sensitive to a very wide range of sensory stimuli or “conditions”. These conditions
include: warmth, sweet tastes and smells, bright highly saturated hues, soothing
sounds, smiling faces, attractive people, symetrical objects, round smooth objects,
sensuous sounds, feelings and shapes (Norman, 2004). All these conditions share one
common property: they can be recognised by the sensory information. The visceral
part of the brain is genetically determined, with the conditions evolving slowly over
the course of evolution. It is incapable of reasoning, of comparing a situation with
past history. Rather, those situations and objects that throughout evolutionary history
offer food, warmth, or protection give rise to positive affect. Similarly conditions
may elicit automatic negative affect: heights, sudden loud sounds or bright lights,
extreme hot or cold, darkness, empty flat terrain, crowds of people, rotting smells,
bitter tastes, sharp objects, misshapen human bodies, snakes and spiders, human
faeces (and its smell), other people’s bodily fluids and vomit (Norman, 2004). Both
lists of visceral conditions arise from Norman’s (2004) presumption of what is
automatically programmed into the human system. The advantage humans have over
other animals is the powerful reflective level that enables human beings to overcome
the dictates of the visceral, purely biological level of cognition (Norman, 2004).
3.3 Visceral Perception and Judgements
Of the human perceptual system, vision dominates; vision is estimated to engage
50% of the cortex and more than 70% of all sensory receptors are visual receptors
(Ware, 2003). Asby and Townsend (1986) argue that visual stimuli are
multidimensional and that some of these dimensions of visual stimuli comprise form,
colour, texture, and motion status. Livingstone and Hubel (1988) concur that our
visual perception can be divided into several components: colour, depth, movement,
form and texture.
41
In 2004, Ware categorised four low-level, perceptual elements of vision: (i) colour,
(ii) texture, (iii) motion and (iv) elements of form. These primary aspects of vision
hold the key to the design of attention grabbing features and the best way of
designing for them. Ware (2003) thus presents a theory of design based on the
science of perception and the fundamental assumption that all humans essentially
possess the same neural-visual architecture and the processes that operate within it.
Labelling his design theory “information psychophysics”, Ware (2003) states that the
same perceptual mechanisms that enable humans to perceive the world, also enable
them to perceive information patterns on computer displays. By extension, the theory
can be applied to both understanding how existing products are processed and to
developing design guidelines for new products (Ware, 2003).
Ware (2003) states that there are three major functional stages of human visual
perception: (i) early vision features; (ii) pattern perception; and (iii) complex objects.
Stage One, early vision features, is processing that includes the optics of the eye, the
characteristics of photoreceptors, and the early stage of neural processing. To some
extent, the ability to perceive the visual world is dependent upon the visual
experience obtained early in life. From research in the neurophysiologic arena it is
known that the properties of neurons in the visual cortex of cats and monkeys are
profoundly influenced by the visual experience of the first few post natal months
(Mitchell and Ware, 1973). Stage Two, pattern perception, is the set of processes that
takes the results of Stage One and discover patterns such as contours, regions and
motion groups. Stage Three, complex objects, is the storing of complex objects in the
visual working memory (Ware, 2003). However, this research approach has its basis
in human computer interaction and, more specifically, in display design. Given the
two dimensional nature of this design industry, it should be noted that these findings
may not be complete in the transference and direct application to three-dimensional
design.
Although visual information frequently dominates our culture and environment
(Postrel, 2003; Schroeder, 2002), it is accepted that the full range of human senses
respond to designs (McDonald, 1998). It is important that a product appearance is
congruent with other sensory aspects of design (Smets, Overbeeke and Gaver, 1994;
42
Smets and Overbeeke, 1995) as the product form that the eye sees creates in the
observer expectation of what the other senses will perceive (Monö, 1997).
People process visual information through the eye while detecting visceral cues from
the body. Each retina is made up of millions of receptors that are sensitive to specific
light frequencies. Sudden increases in light intensity affects the diameter of the
perceiver’s pupils. As with papillary changes in the eye, many of the visceral
receptors have the ability to directly influence the perceiver’s physiological activity
and overt behaviour – generally, without the perceiver’s knowledge. And just as the
firing of the receptors in the retina can result in perceptual image, a pattern of firing
visceral receptors can create a feeling or sensory image (Pennebaker, 1995).
Mountcastle (1980) defines visceral perception as the combination of sensations and
past experience; as “the direct behavioural experience evoked by immediate
stimulation of the sense organs” that results in “a more complete behavioural
experience [involving] the combination of different sensations and their conjunction
with past experience in apprehending and understanding the objects and facts we
encounter in everyday life” (Mountcastle, 1980, p.327).
The visceral information that human beings are constantly processing ultimately
influences their thoughts, language and emotion. By the same token, social and
cognitive process can shape visceral perception and, ultimately, visceral activity
(Pennebaker, 1995). From a medical perspective, how an individual perceives and
uses information from their cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal and
urogenital organs has never been well understood. Traditionally, many
physiologically-orientated researchers have assumed that visceral feedback was
relatively automatic and served as an internal homeostatic process. More recently,
social and cognitively-orientated researchers have hinted that feedback from the
viscera was generally of such poor quality that most of the information was shaped
and often distorted through a basic perceptual bias (Pennebaker, 1995). Adam (2010)
builds upon this with his book Visceral Perception where he explores both traditions.
43
Visceral input to the brain does not have definite, well-articulated semiotics. Unlike
the precise articulation of purely visual experience possible through language,
visceral experience has different verbal expressions of vague, scientifically non-
validated internal states, which are the results of a long historical heritage (Adam,
2010). Similarly, Adam (2010) defines visceral perception as a combination of
present and past, unconscious and conscious mental sensory events.
Visceral instantaneous judgements are snap, immediate responses made by a
consumer in a product-purchasing atmosphere. Exploration of these instant
judgments is perhaps the most important area of visceral design research. The part of
the brain that creates these instantaneous conclusions has been called the “adaptive
unconscious”. It provides people with instant and sophisticated information to warn
of danger, read a stranger, or react to a new idea (Gladwell, 2008). This area of the
brain allows people to function properly by acting as a colossal supercomputer that
quickly, quietly and efficiently processes copious amounts of information from
multiple sources. The adaptive unconscious can make immediate judgements from
minute amounts of information. However, this area of the brain carries out far more
important activities than simply storing primitive drives and conflict-ridden
memories. It is a complex decision-making apparatus that instantly initiates action,
assesses situations and sets goals. Dependent upon the situation, people will swap
between conscious and adaptive unconscious modes of thinking and non-thinking
(Melamed, 2006). Robins and Holmes (2008) state that visceral decisions and
judgments are primarily visual and occur without conscious, analytical cognitive
processing They refer to Maturana and Varela’s (1980) example of a frog deciding to
snatch up a fly within sight as an action facilitated by the nervous system, not by a
level of cognitive process. Additionally, Gladwell (2005) describes the process
humans go through when making rapid cognitive decisions. He argues that
spontaneous decisions are often as good as, or even better than, carefully planned and
considered ones. Gladwell (2005) draws on examples from science, advertising,
sales, medicine and popular music to reinforce his ideas.
44
3.4 Visceral Design and Product Attributes
An individual’s senses are directly affected by visceral design; conversely, designing
for what the senses initially perceive without any deep involvement with the object is
classified as designing for the visceral level or visceral designing. It is important to
note that the primary biological emotion, instinct, will always influence the acquired
secondary emotion, information (Damasio, 1999).
According to Porter, Chibber and Porter (2001), people do not buy coffee machines
or kettles to boil water or make coffee, but for other reasons. Consumers are tempted
to purchase such products because of the visceral aesthetics and sensory perceptions
that they communicate (Stead, Goulev, Evans and Mamdani, 2004) via attributes
such as colour, texture, shape and sound (Meikle, 2005). From the consumer’s point
of view, visceral responses involve an automatic evaluation of the perceptual
properties of an object. Norman and Ortony (2003) claim that this level of design
relates only to the surface appearance of objects: to pure style and pure surface
aesthetics. However, Meikle (2005) claims that the visceral level is hard wired to the
brain to regulate instinctual reactions essential to survival.
Contemporary products are highlighted or remembered because they are sexy,
exciting, appealing or intriguing, not because they are functional, durable,
rechargeable or robust (Villarreal, 2005). The immediate, visceral level is a reaction
to such features and is not based on experience or deep semantic knowledge. There is
no comparison with the past, no expectation of the future. All that counts is the
current state. These reactions are produced by biologically-based, pattern recognition
mechanisms driven solely by the here and now of perceivable features. This is why
the visceral level responses are labelled as perceptually induced (Norman and
Ortony, 2003). Norman and Ortony (2003) believe that because the visceral level is
primarily determined by biology, it is generally universal across people and cultures.
Visceral level emotional reactions are not conscious, and they are not interpreted.
Nevertheless, it is in these reactions that higher level feelings such as anxiety,
concern, satisfaction and pleasure have their origin (Norman and Ortony, 2003).
45
Norman (2004) implies that out of all three levels of cognition (visceral, behavioural
and reflective) the visceral level holds the most value and consistency across peoples
and proposes that:
The principles underlying visceral design are wired in, consistent across people
and cultures. If you design according to these rules, your design will always be
attractive, even if somewhat simple. If you can design for the sophisticated, for
the reflective level, your design can readily become dated because this level is
sensitive to cultural differences, trends in fashion, and continual fluctuation.
Today’s sophistication runs the risk of becoming tomorrow’s discarded. Great
designs, like great art and literature, can break the rules and survive forever,
but only a few are gifted enough to be great. (Norman, 2004, p.67)
While immediate reflexes towards a product can seduce consumers, it is the
overarching experience constructed around a product and its integration into their
lives that enable the consumer to fall in love with such objects. People’s relationships
with products are as complex as many of the products themselves, compounding the
overall connection between the two (Givechi and Velazquez, 2001). Even though the
term “visceral” was not used by Givechi and Velazquez (2001), they ascertain that,
when determining how alluring a product is, first impressions can be quite important.
Individuals may find different attributes of a product exciting and pleasant. A
product’s attributes include the latest model, feature or function, perceived ease of
use, aesthetics, style, sociological factors, novelty, rarity, reliability and value for
money. All of these attributes can be deduced from a product’s first appearance
(Givechi and Velazquez, 2001).
Within visceral design, a product’s direct physical features are product elements that
can be targeted by a designer. Reimann (2005) claims that when discussing visceral
design, confusion will always arise and that there is a misconception that visceral
design is solely related to designing beautiful things; however, this is not what
visceral response entails. It consists of designing for affect, not only aesthetics,
through eliciting different psychological or emotional responses within a particular
context (Reimann, 2005). Research has demonstrated that attractive interfaces are
initially viewed as more functional to certain individuals, even when a user has
46
gained sufficient experience with an interface to have direct evidence to the contrary
(Robins and Holmes, 2008). Reinmann (2005) explains that the reason for this may
be due to users being encouraged by a product’s perceived ease of use and then
making a greater effort to learn how to master the product as they are unwilling to
consider that their investment has been a waste of money (Reimann, 2005).
Bolchini, Pulido and Faiola (2009) state that the visceral properties of an interactive
product are the look, feel and sound, and how a device and interface looks and feels
in the hand of the consumer. They exemplify the iPhone as a product being designed
especially for the visceral level of cognition. While many researchers agree that
Apple very successfully designed for physical and visual impact, no one has
succeeded in defining how exactly this visceral design has been achieved. The
current understanding of successful visceral attributes has not yet advanced
sufficiently to pin down the iPhone’s appeal.
Evaluating the interactive product-user experience without considering the visceral
factors is like evaluating the quality of a meal by looking at the menu – a lot can be
said about the dishes, but the experience is not there. Beyond the visceral experience,
the behavioural level of cognition is about designing device function, interaction or
behaviour. A device well-designed for behavioural cognition becomes intuitive or
complementary to one’s implicit assumptions about how the object might work. To
design for the reflective level of cognition is to appeal to one’s aesthetic sensibilities,
uniqueness and cultural preferences. From a design perspective, consumers relate to
and acquire a device as part of their self-expression (Bolchini, Pulido and Faiola,
2009).
Aesthetic or visceral aspects of a product drive the consumer to make an initial
affective judgment (McDonagh, Bruseberg and Haslam, 2002). According to Bloch,
Brunel and Arnold (2003), a product’s aesthetic characteristics can induce affective
responses. Visceral affective responses are positively influenced by visual aesthetic
characteristics (Veryzer and Hutchinson, 1998; Yamamoto and Lambert, 1994).
User-focused research is regularly used to identify the factors that are the most
attractive to the target market sector. Sadly, this effort is usually focused on
47
achieving sales and not on prolonging the pleasure of the product lifecycle (Davis,
2002).
3.5 Summary
Emotional design is becoming more widely accepted by designers as an aid to their
pursuit of consumer’s emotional attachment. Yet, as a field, design and emotion is
still in its infancy and there remains much to be discovered. Within the realm of
emotional design, Norman (2004) proposes that there are three levels of emotional
cognition: visceral, behavioural and reflective. Each transcends into a different kind
of design, influencing different types of product qualities. Of the three levels of
cognition, Norman (2004) implies that the visceral holds the most value and
consistency across people and cultures.
The term “visceral” has multiple definitions and is used in many different contexts.
However, a commonality in the majority of these definitions and contexts is the
instinctual property and the immediate impact, as manifested in either an instinctual
reaction to survival or to a product. Damasio (1999) notes that the primary instinctual
response will always influence the acquired secondary information. Visceral
instantaneous judgements rely on the “adaptive unconscious”, a complex decision-
making apparatus that instantly assesses situations, accesses past experience and
information, sets goals and initiates action. Gladwell (2005) argues that these
spontaneous decisions are often as good as, or even better than, carefully planned and
considered ones.
A product’s direct physical features are product elements that can be targeted by a
designer. These attributes include: the latest model, a feature or function, perceived
ease of use, aesthetics, style, sociological factors, novelty, rarity, reliability and value
for money (Givechi and Velazquez, 2001). Visceral design is, therefore, designing
for affect, not only aesthetics, through eliciting different physiological or emotional
responses within a particular context (Reimann, 2005).
48
While earlier research has established that visceral design caters to the cognitive
processing of immediate instinct by which the consumer reacts to visual and other
sensory aspects of a product, it is within this immediate level of cognition that many
knowledge gaps exist. Many involving a shared lack of understanding as to what in a
design causes a visceral response and how to design for it. This need was highlighted
by the other two levels of cognition (behavioural and reflective) already establishing
a set of design tools to aid designers in addressing relevant criteria. The area of
consumer hedonics will be discussed in more detail in chapter 4.
49
50
51
Chapter 4: Consumer Hedonics
Since the beginning of time, humans have sought pleasure, gaining enjoyment from
the natural environment: from the beauty of flowers, from bathing in soothing waters
or from the refreshment of a cool breeze. People have actively sought pleasure by
creating activities and pastimes to stretch their mental and physical capabilities or to
express their creativity. Cave-dwellers wrestled to test their strength and expressed
themselves through painting on the walls of their dwellings. Today people “pump
iron” in the gymnasium and decorate their homes with selected possessions. Jordan
(2000) adds another source of pleasure to this modern list: the products with which
people surround themselves. Consumers experiencing and seeking pleasure through
the attainment or purchase of a product is identified as “consumer hedonics”.
4.1 Hedonics: The Pursuit of Pleasure
Hirschman and Holbrok (1982) define “hedonics” as the branch of psychology that
studies the mind’s pleasant and unpleasant sensations. It can also be described as the
emotional state of pleasure or displeasure that an individual feels (Barrett, Mesquita,
Ochsner and Gross, 2007; Hekkert, 2002; Fowler, 1991). Fowler (1991) defines
“hedonism” as the doctrine that pleasure is the highest good; the pursuit of pleasure;
a life-style devoted to pleasure seeking (Fowler, 1993). The quest for hedonic
experience is widespread, even though few people are able to devote themselves
entirely to pleasure. Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) associate the emotions of
pleasure, arousal, fantasies, feelings and fun with the hedonic experience. Within the
hedonic experience, an individual has their own important role to play and,
ultimately, controls their own spontaneous, intense emotion and imagination. An
individual is allowed the opportunity to dream through hedonism. Campbell (1987)
goes so far as to say that an individual creates magic in this world through hedonism.
52
Emotions occur regardless of age, gender, culture or economic status, and humans
have and will continue to develop products that attempt to produce sought-after
emotions such as happiness and enjoyment. Years of industrialisation have created
functional and pleasurable products with which humans surround themselves.
Products are able to increase both the quality of life and pleasure of their owners and
users (Jordan, 2000). A survey conducted by Norman (2004) on the products people
love and hate found that loved products were too obvious and entangled in the users’
lives to be noticed, while hated products were not present among the consumer’s
possessions. In general, it was found that people are passionate about their
belongings (Norman, 2004). When using and designing a product, the consumer and
the design industry both feel the importance of hedonics and the pursuit of
pleasurable design (Porter, Chibber and Porter, 2001).
Ashby and Johnson (2003) state that while good design works, excellent design also
gives pleasure. Pleasure is derived from form, colour, texture, feel, and the
associations and perceptions that these invoke. Pleasing design says something about
itself; it clearly communicates the design intent or the product message. Ashby and
Johnson (2003) state that, generally speaking, honest statements are more satisfying
than deception; however, eccentric or humorous designs can also be appealing. They
apply this general observation of human interaction to consumer-product interaction:
attachment or detachment may be caused through emotions that an individual feels
towards a product. The strong emotional bond that is felt between a person and a
product is referred to as the positive emotional state of “product attachment”.
Conversely, the negative emotional state and lack of linkage between an individual
and the product is referred to as “detachment” (Savas, 2001).
4.2 Hedonic Consumption
Levine (2006) states that when people are happy, sad, angry, bored or feeling nothing
at all, they shop. Noting also that consumption is a social activity – that is, it happens
inside a structure larger than a single person or family – Levine also stresses that the
consumption experience is very personal. After people satisfy their hunger with food
and shelter themselves from the cold with a roof over their heads, emotional
53
shopping is next on the agenda. There is no way to approach the problem of
overconsumption without investigating the feelings that surround fantasising,
purchasing, and owning stuff… lots of stuff (Levine, 2006).
Where hedonics is anything relating to the pursuit of pleasure, hedonic consumption
is a behaviour caused by the act of consumption. Hedonic consumption refers to the
elements of a consumer’s behaviour that respond to the product purchase and usage
experience (Helander and Tham, 2003), as differentiated by Hirshman and Holbrook
(1982) from the general term “hedonics” for anything relating to or marked by
pleasure. According to Hirshman and Holbrook (1982), all facets of consumer
behaviour that correlate to the multi-sensory, fantasy and emotive aspects of product
usage are defined as “hedonic consumption” and are closely related to aspects of the
product purchasing and handling experience. This view links closely to Norman’s
(2004) theories of pleasurable pursuits. An understandably important area of study, it
is hedonic consumption that ultimately reveals insights into consumer behaviour that
contribute to the mainstream areas of marketing and research.
Hopkinson and Pujari (1999) discuss consumer hedonics as an experience sought
after by a new trend of consumers. Specifically looking at the water adventure sport
of kayaking, they report on findings of a quantitative study aimed at identifying the
underpinning reason for participation in this sport and its new popularity (Hopkinson
and Pujari, 1999). The goal of a designer is to create pleasurable products and,
ultimately, experiences which provide the consumer with fun and enjoyable
memories that bring joy and happiness to their lives. Somewhat cynically, Aumer-
Ryan and Hatfield (2007) express that, true to these idealistic motives, emotional
design aims to reduce the frustration that individuals normally feel when dealing
with computerised designs, while also enticing customers to part with their
disposable income. Hirshman and Holbrok, (1982) consider the field of hedonic
consumption, which contributes to the state of consumer pleasure, as demonstrative
of the design goal.
Crusen and Snelders (2002) note that a consumer derives aesthetic pleasure from the
appearance of a product; however, there is little existing knowledge about a
54
consumer’s subjective perceptions and preferences which determine a product’s
hedonic value or the magnitude of their pleasure. The way in which a consumer is
attracted to and evaluates a product through its appearance and shape elicits much
debate.
Hassenzahl (2004) investigates the relationship between perceived usability, hedonic
attributes, satisfaction and beauty of four different Mp3 player computer digital
interfaces. The study involved thirty-three participants who were required to select a
beauty rating for each interface and report their rating on a questionnaire. Results
show that satisfaction and beauty are related and stress the subjective valuation of a
product. Satisfaction is dependent upon both perceived usability and hedonic
attributes (Hassenzahl, 2004).
Emotions are classified into positive and negative frames when a user’s response is
observed. A product is thought to have succeeded when positive emotions are
displayed and to be unsuccessful when negative emotions are observed (Aumer-Ryan
and Hatfield, 2007). Davis (2002) highlights that there is no guarantee that a
pleasurable experience that exists at the beginning of a purchase will continue
throughout that product’s serviceable life. Conversely, even if a consumer
experiences an initial negative response to a product, this does not mean that it
cannot turn into a positive sense of pleasure with further use or interaction (Davis,
2002).
A consumer’s pleasure is maximised when the hedonic value of the product they
possess is designed especially to suit their needs and desires (Jordan, 2000). Crozier
(1994) attributes consumer preference, and consequent product design and
pleasurability, to cultural, historical, economical and technical factors. Jordan (2000)
concurs that any changes to cultural and circumstantial influences is likely to have an
effect on product design and desirability (Jordan, 2000). Different types of needs are
said to be stable; however, their relevance and resultant associated emotions are fluid
and fleeting (Hassenzahl, 2004). Furthermore, it is possible that it will become
increasingly difficult to predict the tastes and, therefore, the hedonic value system of
consumers based on the characteristics of their demographic. This difficulty has
55
created a challenge for companies trying to appeal to a single target group (Jordan,
2000).
4.3 Consumer Choices and Decisions
A consumer’s hedonic choice is the decision made to purchase a product for the
enjoyment, pleasure and excitement it affords (Hansen, 1972). The general study of
hedonics is applied to consumer choices to investigate a consumer’s desire to buy
pleasurable products. Consumers have often reported wanting functional or tangible
attributes when purchasing products; however, there is also a demand for a hedonic
benefit or a satisfying emotional response and experience when using a product
(Hassenzahl, 2001; McDonald, 1998).
The difference between hedonic and utilitarian consumer benefits, and the trade-offs
involving these two dimensions, has been an active area of research in recent years
(Chitturi, Raghunathan and Mahajan, 2007). In the literature, “hedonic benefits” are
defined as those pertaining to aesthetic and experimental benefits that are often
labelled as luxuries. Utilitarian benefits are defined as those pertaining to
instrumental and functional benefits that are closer to necessities than luxuries (Batra
and Ahtola, 1990; Chitturi, Raghunathan and Mahajan, 2007; Dhar and Wertenbroch,
2000; Strahilevitz and Myers, 1998). Dhar and Wertenbroch (2000) also specifically
link the luxurious states of fun, pleasure, fantasy and excitement to hedonic goods.
Many researchers (Maslow, 1970; Weber, 1998; Zheng and Kivetz, 2009) agree that
consumers have more difficulty spending money on hedonic rather than utilitarian
products due to the inherent association of the hedonic with luxuries, as compared to
the utilitarian association with necessities (Hoyer, 1984). From this stems the idea
that consumers need external justifications such as promotions, sales and emotional
attachments to help them make a hedonic purchase decision.
Building on an idea raised in earlier studies, Chitturi (2009) states that consumption
of hedonic and utilitarian design benefits evoke different types and intensities of
negative and positive emotions. Products appearing to offer hedonic benefits but
failing to fulfil consumer expectations may evoke a variety of negative emotions
56
when compared with products that appear to offer utilitarian benefits and actually
deliver the expected consumption experience (Chitturi, Raghunathan and Mahajan,
2008). Prior work has focused primarily on post-consumption positive emotions,
whereas Chitturi (2009) focuses on negative post consumption experiences.
Feeling good as the result of product consumption enables problems with the product
to be dealt with more easily, resulting in a more harmonious interaction (Norman,
2004). When consumers are more stimulated by pleasant and pleasurable aspects of a
design it makes the consumer more tolerable to difficulties with functional and
interface issues (Norman, 2004); that is, shortfalls in the functional aspects of a
product’s design may be forgiven (or less emphasised in customer feedback) because
of the correct manifestation of its pleasurable aspects. The common conclusion of all
of these studies is that utilitarian and hedonic considerations drive consumer choices.
Creusen and Snelders’ (2002) study investigates hedonic consumer judgements and
the way in which they are formed from product attributes. It was found that if
pleasurable aspects of a product are not present in a distinct way, it is not possible for
consumers to describe these aspects in specific terms. It was also found that
consumers derive pleasure from the form or appearance of the product (Creusen and
Snelders, 2002). Thus, the pleasurable or hedonic attributes of a product can be
considered as occupying a subset of visceral attributes. In light of Creusen and
Snelders’ findings, a distinct presence or enunciation of these visceral hedonic
attributes becomes vital to consumer-product attachment.
Consumer choice is validated and measured in Creusen and Snelders’ (2002)
research through participants self-reporting their emotions in the choice of two
products. Using two questionnaires, Creusen and Snelders show that pleasure is one
aspect of a broad involvement with products and that it is independent of consumers’
rational involvement with the product. Their (2002) questionnaire uses a hedonic
scale to measure the emotional response; however, whether this combination of
measurement and response constitutes a visceral hedonic response or a general
hedonic emotional response is unknown. The recorded response does not distinguish
between the levels of cognitive processing or response; the response may have arisen
57
through visceral, behavioural or reflective cognition, or may even be the result of the
symbiotic processing of all three levels. The need to separate, measure and compare
individual responses and to determine their triggers, is still a significant gap in the
literature.
Dhar and Wertenbroch (2000) state that research into consumer behaviour needs to
address the manner in which consumers make fundamental tradeoffs. How utilitarian
and hedonic goods are selected by consumers and ultimately influenced by the nature
of the decision, is discussed by Dar and Wertenbroch (2000). They examine
consumer choice between two goods, one of which is seen as superior on a hedonic
dimension and the other on a utilitarian dimension. They compare preferences for
these goods in an acquisition condition in which the consumer must choose which of
the two to acquire and which to give up. Two experiments of choice show the
hedonic item being preferred over the utilitarian object (Dhar and Wertenbroch,
2000).
The ability for a consumer to avoid hedonic temptations, such as overspending and
smoking, has also been examined by many researchers (Kivetz and Simonson, 2002;
Dhar and Wentenbroch, 2000). Research has been carried out regarding how
consumer behaviour is affected by their financial goals. Consumers who are
focussed on shorter term, specific goals (perhaps saving money towards payment of
current bills) incorporate oppositional forms of self-control through techniques such
as avoiding spending on non-utilitarian necessities. However, when the
psychological cost of commitments is less concrete, consumers may feel more
inclined to choose objects that are perceived as an indulgence or luxury. For
example, when faced with a less-specific, long term goal such as saving for a college
education, a consumer is less inhibited in spending money on a cruise. Real process
measures and hypothetical choices have all tested the above propositions. In a similar
vein, studies have demonstrated that consumers prefer hedonic luxury rewards
instead of receiving cash of equal or greater value (Kivetz and Simonson, 2002; Dhar
and Wentenbroch, 2000). Such behaviour may be explained by consumers not
wishing to pre-commit to indulgence or not wishing to reassign or “waste” the award
on necessities. Studies have shown that a consumer will most likely purchase a
58
luxury object when they realise how they will utilise that possible reward, learn that
the odds of winning it are quite low, or only realise the enormity of their purchase in
the distant future (Kivetz and Simonson, 2002).
Jordan (1998) found that opinion is formed faster with pleasure-related products than
with purely functional ones, with pleasure being determined before actual use of the
product in half of the respondents’ cases. This is evidence that consumers are able to
perceive pleasure before they have actually used or purchased the product (Jordan,
1998) and agrees with Norman’s (2004) contention that visceral responses occur
before significant interaction occurs. The visceral hedonic response is also
instantaneous, as per Jordan’s (1998) theory. It differs only from a purely visceral
response in that the visceral may be a complete rejection or disliking of the product,
though still instantaneous. Jordan (1997) also found that interaction with
displeasurable products results in displeasurable emotions and that it is likely that
negative emotions will last longer than positive ones (Jordan, 1997). Respondents
indicated a definite correlation between the high frequency of use and the
pleasureability of the product. Pleasurable products or features were also said to
influence future purchase decisions (Jordan, 1998).
Adaval’s (2001) work on the influence of differential weighting of consumer
responses, indicates that self-conscious emotional response is less immediate and
more subject to remembered experience. Comparatively, hedonic responses are
considered to be more important in consumer purchase judgements and decisions
than utilitarian criteria. This would suggest that utilitarian–based decisions are more
reliant on behavioural response and other cognitive processes that have greater
access to memory-based rationalisations, and that hedonic decision-making is firmly
grounded in visceral response and plays the dominant role in purchase decisions.
Literature pertaining to this specific area of visceral hedonics is lacking, especially
from a product design perspective. Demirbilek and Sener (2001) investigated how a
person’s happiness can be triggered through products and which attributes of a
product create such positive emotions. While their study may be concerned with
establishing hedonistic physical attributes, it does not contemplate the correlation
59
between the specific subset of visceral hedonic response and product attributes.
Demirbilek and Sener acknowledge that in order to measure this human-product
phenomenon, more knowledge is needed in the area of emotional connection
between a consumer and the product design itself (2001).
4.4 Summary
It has been established that hedonics is the pursuit of pleasure, and an examination of
how an individual actively pursues pleasure by responding to certain objects and
experiences. People are passionate about their belongings. Levine (2006) notes that
shopping as a social activity is an inherently hedonic pursuit. A need for hedonic
design logically follows; design that delivers the sought after hedonic experience of
consumption: a pleasurable product purchase and usage experience.
Ashby and Johnson (2003) state that while good design works, excellent design also
gives pleasure. The design goal is, therefore, to create pleasurable products and
experiences (Aumer-Ryan and Hatfield, 2007; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982).
Well-designed products are able to increase the quality of life of their owners and
can cause affects such as attachment, thereby promoting a product’s purchase,
extended lifespan or increased use. A common conclusion of researchers is that
utilitarian and hedonic considerations drive consumer choices. Jordan (1998) found
that opinion is formed faster with pleasure-related products than purely functional
ones. Often, hedonic value is decided upon before actual use of the product.
Much debated throughout time, the concept of aesthetic appeal and its physical form
eludes conclusive definition. Little information exists regarding a consumer’s
subjective perceptions and preferences in determining a product’s hedonic value.
However, Jordan (2000) concludes that a consumer’s pleasure is maximised when a
product is designed specially to suit their needs and desires. While luxury is a chief
association with hedonic products, the honest manifestation of product capabilities is
also more likely to prolong the positive effect. Like visceral response, hedonic
response is similarly influenced by cultural, historical, economical and technical
factors. Finally, because hedonic response relies on the consumer’s cognitive
60
processing of sensory information, hedonic attributes are firmly established as a
subset of visceral attributes.
Recorded product responses may have arisen through visceral, behavioural or
reflective cognition. While previous studies have examined hedonic emotional
responses and hedonistic physical attributes, these different levels of cognitive
processing have not been successfully separated and measured. Further work is
required to correlate the specific subset of hedonic response with product attributes.
How these attributes elicit hedonic response is investigated by product rhetoric and
will be discussed in the next chapter.
61
62
63
Chapter 5: Product Rhetoric
Rhetoric, the art of persuasion, has been recognised and discussed for at least 2,500
years. The topic has been debated and explored by ancient Greek philosophers such
as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Cicero, who perceived rhetoric as a verbal art or
skill. This ancient Greek art is the basis on which the theory of rhetoric was
established. Throughout history, rhetoric has been defined as the art of speaking well
or the art of persuasive verbal communication. According to Perina (2004), the
traditional persuasive art of rhetoric does not have positive connotations in today’s
society; this is probably due to its overuse in politics, advertising and promotion.
Most commonly understood in a verbal form, especially in politics, rhetoric is today
strongly associated with the unethical misuse of persuasive argument by political and
economic elitists. The reputation and standing of rhetoric has suffered due to this
political association (Perina, 2004).
It has only been in the last few centuries that rhetorical theorists started to apply this
theory to the written form of language as well as to other human communication
disciplines. And only in the last century has this understanding been acknowledged
and connected with the design discipline for the first time (Perina, 2004; Booth,
1983). Over the years, rhetoric has developed interdisciplinary associations with the
common goal of strategically effective communication (Erlhoff and Marshall, 2007).
According to Erlhoff and Marshall (2007), the application of rhetoric to the design
field takes place on two levels. The first level involves offering practical information;
for example, on presenting knowledge and ideas, structuring and shaping
communication and on the art of memorising. The second level involves the
possibility of deriving higher order models. These models describe the relationship
between theory and practice, between production and analysis, as well as the process
of rhetorical communications (Erlhoff and Marshall, 2007).
64
5.1 Visual Rhetoric: Interpreting the Visual Media
Scott defined visual rhetoric in 1994 as the framing of messages; as finding the
method and manner for effective persuasion. Visual rhetoric is a recent development,
providing a theoretical framework to describe how visual images communicate their
message, as opposed to aural or verbal messages. Kress and Van Leeuwen in 1996
added to the field of visual rhetoric by also examining the relationship between
images and writing. This relationship between images and writing has also been
examined through the study of semiotics, using semiotic analysis of various visual
stimuli. Most semiotic studies have focused on two-dimensional images such as
marketing advertisements and graphic designs.
Indeed, visual rhetoric has been of particular interest and relevance in its application
to advertising. McQuarrie and Mick (1999), Seliger (2008) and Bulmer and
Buchanan-Oliver (2006) have promoted and analysed this application; however,
visual rhetoric in advertising has mostly concentrated on graphic design elements and
textual marketing messages. Some examples of work analysed by those in the larger
field of visual rhetoric – charts, paintings, sculpture, diagrams, web pages,
advertisements, movies, architecture, newspapers and photographs (Kress and Van
Leeuwen, 1996) – reveal that the analysed images extend to three dimensional
samples and varying mediums, and are sourced from various industries.
Seliger (2008) claims that the field of visual rhetoric describes how visual language
can be constructed and used for persuasion. He also maintains that the decisions in
design do influence the messages and meanings the user receives. Seliger’s 2008
study investigates how graphic expression and visual language are used for
persuasion. The research material consists of outdoor advertisements photographed
in their actual exhibition spaces in a city environment. The study identifies the
emergence of three different types of visual rhetoric: brand rhetoric, personalised
rhetoric and poetic rhetoric (Seliger, 2008), and concludes that the decisions in the
design influenced the messages and meanings created by the advertisements. This
research calls for further studies into the application and transference of visual
rhetoric to design. As Sutherland (1993, p.120) points out: “much of advertising
65
creates only marginal differences, but even the small differences can tip the balance
in favour of the advertised brand”.
5.2 Design Rhetoric: A Product Language
Rhetoric is a tool and, as such, it can be used for many different purposes and
agendas (Perina, 2004). Design rhetoric designates the specific language or tools
used by a designer (source) to communicate a message they encode in a product. As
the physical manifestation of this message, the product is interpreted by the
consumer (receiver), enabling understanding, perception and appreciation of the
designer’s intended message and judgement of the product’s value (Crilly, Moultrie
and Clarkson, 2004).
In 1957, Weiman and Walter claimed that rhetoric skills are instruments to transmit
and convey meanings and enhance consumers’ perceptions. More than just merely
transporting messages, the rhetoric of a design has the potential to influence design
creation, reputation and culture, conveying messages both symbolically and
figuratively (Weiman and Walter, 1957). Building on this theory, Buchanan (1985)
and Redstrom (2006) argue that all kinds of design are intended to influence
consumer behaviour, in the sense that the products around us contain socially
constructed messages for users.
Products embody cultural values and knowledge drawn from many fields of learning,
as well as express values and knowledge in a complex debate conducted not in words
but in non-verbal language. Buchanan (2001) found that this also applies to modern-
day products and services in the digital realm through: their representation of
communication; their synthesis of images and words; and through the blending of
actions, environments and systems of use that are both physical and cultural. This
becomes evident when considering the features of products that make the product
persuasive and influential (Buchanan, 2001; Buchanan, 1995).
Perina (2004) states that rhetoric increases the level of communication and
understanding between people and objects and that the effectiveness of rhetoric
66
directly depends on the use of patterns and symbols that are familiar to the targeted
audience (Perina, 2004). Perina’s (2004) study deconstructs a variety of furniture
items from a rhetoric perspective, dissecting themes and inspirations to speculate on
what the furniture designers were trying to communicate through their individual
designs. Her study concludes that a designer’s rhetoric is related to experience and
cultural background and, therefore, has a high level of dependence on societal
knowledge and cultural values. Perina (2004) states that rhetoric is part of everyday
life and an inseparable part of society. All designers and all users have some
knowledge within their social and cultural background; therefore, all human-made
objects contain rhetoric (Morgan and Starck, 1999). No design is produced that does
not have rhetorical content.
Branco, Dias, Ginoulhiac, Branco and Branco (2001) describe appealing and
persuasive products as requiring an interactive rhetoric treatment; as not merely
speaking in a monologue or having a one-way transmission of information and
communication. They conducted research within this context, aiming to create a
theory of rhetoric as interaction in the belief that interaction is the key element that
tends to qualify the surfaces of objects (either physical or virtual) and to produce a
network of non-themed emotions. Perina’s 2004 study also reveals a more intentional
use of rhetoric by designers and, therefore, a more discursive communication to the
design process. The main conclusion drawn by Branco, Dias, Ginoulhiac, Branco
and Branco (2001) is how lacking the field is in knowledge of the interactive nature
of rhetoric and that there is an urgent need to produce a unifying theory of rhetoric
within product and system interactions (Branco, Dias, Ginoulhiac, Branco and
Branco, 2001). The framework for the design dialogue presented in Chapter 2 of this
study lays the foundation for satisfying this need; however, the specific tools or
rhetoric to assist a designer in transmitting their persuasive message and interacting
with the consumer, require further development.
Perina’s 2004 study identifies that rhetoric in design uses three basic elements:
technological reasoning, character and emotion. Buchanan (2001), agreeing that
rhetoric in products plays an imperative role in the product’s success, also
emphasises that technology exerts a strong and growing influence on product design
67
in the twenty-first century, and continues to say that there is an increasing distance
between the two fields of technology and design. Buchanan (2001) suggests that a
suitable theory of rhetoric in design would be one in which technology is viewed
fundamentally as a rhetorical problem to be integrated within the field of design,
rather than the other way around (Buchanan and Margolin, 1995). Additionally,
Buchanan (2001) believes that, like all good persuasive speeches, rhetoric only
comes to life when it is delivered correctly.
While it is unwise to believe that, in the pluralism of culture, design can be reduced
to rhetoric – that one set of language or tools can represent the myriad of human
variation – it may be useful to reflect on the significance of design for the
understanding of rhetoric (Buchanan, 2001). The typical view of design as a styling
of the appearance of products is a serious misconception of the actual work of the
designers. It is comparable to the popular view of rhetoric as a mere styling of verbal
expression. For both arts (of styling and traditional rhetoric), the deeper work lies in
the invention and disposition of form and content (Buchanan, 2001).
Barthes stated in 1977 that rhetoric can inevitably vary in substance but not
necessarily in form: “it is even probable that there exists a single rhetorical form”
(Barthes, 1977, p. 49). By this, Barthes suggests that the rhetoric of an artefact is
confined to one specific language to the extent that it is subject to the physical
constraints of vision (Barthes, 1977). In 1987, McKeon argued that rhetoric should
once again become a universal art (a cross-disciplinary theory across all liberal arts
disciplines from fine art to marketing) in order to help us address new problems and
circumstances in culture. This implies that rhetoric sometimes decays into
specialisation; that certain creative disciplines have developed their own application
and understanding of rhetoric in isolation. The subsequent failure to then evaluate
mono-disciplinary findings against the broad frame of rhetoric has thus diminished
the significance and general application of rhetoric as liberal art.
Across all disciplines of design, there is no criteria to identify rhetoric, and a
unifying theory of design rhetoric remains unexplored (Erlhoff and Marshall, 2007).
Kaufer and Butler (1996), however, proclaim that rhetoric is undergoing a new era of
68
research and development, with designers helping shape it to meet modern
contemporary demands. Both of these views highlight the necessity to establish
rhetoric as a design element in this study. The prospect of rhetoric that we envision
and that we see unfolding today will require changes in our way of thinking and
theory, practice and production. Perhaps, the consideration of rhetoric in design will
help us to relate words and things in a new way, offering insight into the new
universal rhetoric of our time (Buchanan, 2001).
Yet, the ethical question still remains: What does the design message aim to persuade
one towards? In general terms today, we understand the message to be quite simple:
to consume; to select this product for purchase over others. However, this was
probably not the case in ancient Greece, when Plato and Socrates were first
conceptualising rhetoric as a theory of persuasion. Akrich (1992) provides the
example that if a chair is positioned at a workstation, its position and association
communicate the intended function of the chair: to entice the user to sit down.
However, this study is more concerned with identifying, for example, the rhetoric
involved in the design elements of the chair and workstation that influence the
consumer’s choice to sit or not to sit.
5.3 Product Rhetoric: The Language of Successful Products
Product rhetoric is communicating the message from the designer (source) through
the medium of the product (transmitter) to the consumer (receiver), thus enabling
them to understand, perceive and appreciate the product and the value it holds
(Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004). Buchanan (2001) states that if a product is
persuasive in its design and influences how people live their lives, it is because a
designer has achieved a powerful and compelling balance of what is perceived to be
useful, usable and desirable (Buchanan, 2001).
Buchanan (2001) even goes on to suggest that the “designer, instead of simply
making an object is actually creating a persuasive argument that comes to life
whenever a user considers or uses that product as a means to some form of end”
(Buchanan, 1985, p. 8). In 1985, Buchanan claimed that in approaching a design
69
from a rhetorical perspective, a designer’s view should be that all products – digital
and analogue, tangible and intangible – are vivid arguments about how people should
live their lives (Buchanan, 1985). The “arguments” provide alternative choices for
the user in the manner in which they conduct short-term tasks and activities of
everyday living. These “arguments”, however, also have long-term implications that
are more subtle and less easily understood (Borgmann, 1987). Products have
persistent consequences in the behaviour of human beings, whether considering a
product’s style or its deeper synthesis of technological reasoning. Due to this fact, the
establishment of criteria for successful products is one of the central wicked
problems of design thinking today (Buchanan, 1992). It is essentially a political
problem of competing values and priorities that designers must learn to navigate with
integrity. Perina (2004) acknowledges the role of the designer to individually
recognise where rhetoric is used as a tool to persuade towards an agenda, and where
it can be used as a tool to successfully convey a message.
In a capitalist system, rhetoric is used to consume more products in situations when
society is already saturated with functional products. This message to consume could
be hidden behind many aspects of rhetoric, and is generally presented as adding
quality to people’s lives (Perina, 2004). Rhetoric could be used to open the gate of
diversity of forms, therefore enabling fashions and styles and never ending
“upgrades”. A successful product would have one target: to capture the consumer by
its simplicity, rhetoric and clear symbols. Some parts of the market, Apple and Alessi
for example, have realised this and make deliberate efforts in the use of emotions and
rhetoric to gain a distinguished space in the market (Perina, 2004): “One of the
interesting things about the ipod, one of the things that people love most about it is
not the technology; it’s the box it comes in. That’s because Apple really understood
their customer and what they wanted” (Norman, cited in Zachry, 2005. p.469).
Sudjic (2008) states that design has become the language with which to shape
products and with which to tailor the messages that they carry. The role of the most
sophisticated designers today is as much to be storytellers – to make design that
speaks in such a way as to convey a message – as it is to resolve formal and
functional problems. Designers manipulate this design language more or less
70
skilfully or engagingly, to convey the kind of story that a product speaks to a
consumer (Sudjic, 2008). In understanding the language of design (expressed by the
shape, colour, texture and imagery of an object), there are constant paradoxes
between function and symbolism to be addressed. For example, some colours are
associated with the male more than the female and some materials suggest luxury
(Sudjic, 2008). Design is the language that a society uses to create objects that reflect
purposes and social values. It can be used in ways that are manipulative and cynical,
or creative and purposeful. Design is the language that helps to define, or perhaps to
signal, value. It creates the visual and tactile clues that signal precious or cheap, even
if – given the infinite capacity of the human mind for irony and the permanent quest
for novelty – these signals are regularly subverted (Sudjic, 2008).
Companies communicate their brand primarily though designs. Decisions regarding
design are frontline strategic decisions, and this is only likely to increase as we move
into a new modernity (Marzano, 1999). This area of research is known more
commonly as “design led innovation”, which aims at radically changing the
emotional and symbolic content of products (that is, their meaning and language)
through a deep understanding of broader changes in society, culture and technology.
Rather than being dominated (or “pulled”) by user requirements, design led
innovation is driven (or “pushed”) by a company’s vision about possible new product
meanings and languages that could diffuse in society (Verganti, 2008).
In the wider field of design, a unifying theory of rhetoric remains unexplored. This is
surprising when issues of communication and rhetoric in design display a strong
influence on the product design process (Barthes, 1977). However, rhetoric is
undergoing a new era of research and development, with designers helping to shape
it to meet contemporary demands (Kaufer and Butler, 1996). If designers can benefit
from rhetorical insights, then design can continue to influence and form society
through its persuasive assertions. Uncovering what designers need to discover is an
entirely new aspect of demonstrative rhetoric that will significantly affect the
understanding of product influence in the future.
71
5.4 Summary
The field of rhetoric dates back many centuries and has been used in many
disciplines. Visual rhetoric, as a method and manner for effective persuasion via
visual media, has been of particular interest to the advertising industry for its
application to the design of billboards and printed marketing material. Seliger’s
(2008) recent study, however, calls for further studies in visual rhetoric and its
application and transference to design.
Rhetoric is a tool which can be used for many different purposes and agendas;
however, design rhetoric is specifically aimed at conveying messages between
designers, products and consumers. Because all designers and consumers have their
own experiences, cultural background and societal knowledge, all human-made
objects contain rhetoric; no design is produced that does not have rhetorical content.
The spread of research on rhetoric as a collective is vast; however, specific product
rhetoric literature is not well developed. Branco, Dias, Ginoulhiac, Branco and
Branco (2001) decry the lack of a unifying theory of product rhetoric to assist a
designer in transmitting a persuasive message to, and interacting with, the consumer.
As Buchanan (2001) believes, rhetoric – like all good persuasive speeches – only
comes to life when it is delivered correctly. The framework for the design dialogue
presented in chapter 2 of this study is based on work by Crilly, Moultrie and
Clarkson (2004) and goes some way towards elucidating the interactive consumer-
designer dialogue. However, translation of this knowledge into specific design
practices and tools requires further work.
Kaufer and Butler (1996) assert that rhetoric is undergoing a new era of research and
development. In fact, Verganti (2008) claims that, through an advanced
understanding of the movements in society, culture and technology, design led
innovation and strategic branding has the potential to radically change consumer
markets and needs. Chapter 6 brings together all the literature reviewed, to create the
novel area of visceral hedonic rhetoric.
72
73
Chapter 6: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
This Chapter brings together the four main areas of literature reviewed in the
previous chapters – [i] emotion and the design dialogue, [ii] visceral design, [iii]
consumer hedonics and [iv] product rhetoric – to form the foci of this study. It is this
conglomerate of research that has created the emerging area of visceral hedonic
rhetoric. This chapter will provide a summary of the literature reviewed and define
the meaning of the term “visceral hedonic rhetoric” used throughout this study.
6.1 Defining Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
Based on the four main areas of literature reviewed, the term “visceral hedonic
rhetoric” emerged. In this study, “visceral hedonic rhetoric” is defined as properties
of a product that persuasively elicit the pursuit of pleasure through an instinctual
level of cognition. Within this definition, the phrase “properties of a product” refers
to the product’s physical attributes such as size, material, colour, smell, form or other
distinguishing features.
6.2 Literature Summary
Damasio (1999) observes that the visceral or immediate, instinctual response to
sensory information will always strongly influence the secondary information
acquired when further and subsequent behavioural and reflective cognitive
interaction occurs. Ashby and Johnson (2003) state that while good design works,
excellent design also gives pleasure. Buchanan’s (2001) research claims that a
successful product is persuasive in its design and actually influences how people live
their lives. As a product’s direct physical features or attributes are product elements
that can be targeted by a designer, the pinnacle of good design would be a product
that is immediately appealing enough in its physical manifestation to draw a
consumer into further interaction and investigation, that reveals a functional and
74
user-friendly interface, and predicts emerging needs in its potential market.
Successful production of such an object could potentially result in guaranteed
product purchase through immediate consumer attachment, and in increased product
use and prolonged product life through maintaining consumer attachment over a
longer period of time; for example, as was the case with the Volkswagen Beetle.
Emotional design is becoming increasingly more popular as a research field and
industry focus. Understanding design for emotional response, however, is becoming
a greater challenge for companies trying to fit or meet the needs of a single target
group. This is largely due to the growing difficulty in predicting the tastes and,
therefore, the hedonic value system of consumers in a global and shifting market
place. Hassenzahl (2004) asserts that while different types of needs may be
considered stable, the relevance and emotions associated with these needs are fluid
and fleeting. Norman (2004) concludes that the visceral level of cognition holds the
most value and consistency across people and cultures and, therefore, presents the
best opportunity to establish a set of core design principles.
Considerable research and knowledge surround the behavioural and reflective levels
of cognition and their consequent impact on affect and consumer behaviour or action.
Design tools have been established for both behavioural and reflective design, and
the efficacy of these design tools has been established and proven in both theory and
practice. Liu (2003) posits that designers’ implicit understanding of perception and
visual composition, along with their experience and skills, has informed their
intuitive judgement in producing a hedonic visceral impression. However, the dearth
of quantitative or qualitative research in this particular area highlights the urgency to
further the identification and knowledge of visceral hedonic responses.
Some studies have attempted to categorise certain product attributes and identify
their corresponding level of cognition. Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer,
Ramlingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman, (2008) were successful in demonstrating
that some direct correlations exist between certain qualities and certain emotional
responses. However, their study asked participants to provide examples of products
they either liked or disliked; these were then matched to a series of descriptive words
75
belonging to each level of cognition. The issue with this approach is that visceral
response is inherently fleeting; it is an instantaneous and momentary judgement,
which cannot be reproduced at a later stage in an interview.
Other studies have targeted the relationship between hedonic consumer judgements
and the production of these relationships in response to product attributes. Creusen
and Snelders (2002) requested participants use a hedonic scale to self-report their
emotional response in the choice between two products. It was found that consumers
derive pleasure from the form or appearance of a product and that, if pleasurable
aspects were not clearly enunciated in the appearance of a product, they were unable
to describe the pleasurable aspects in specific terms. It is possible to deduce from this
study that at least some hedonic attributes must be credited as visceral response in
that they arise from sensory information. However, whether this self-reported
combination measure response constituted a visceral hedonic response or a general
hedonic emotional response is unknown. Creusen and Snelders (2002) did not
separate and measure responses to each of the three cognitive levels; rather, a general
hedonic emotional response was recorded. The need to separate and measure each
response against the others remains a significant gap in the current research.
No designed product is without rhetorical content. Therefore, the delivery of a
hedonic message via visceral interpretation may not be as successful in the absence
of a visceral hedonic rhetoric to assist and inform the design process. Buchanan’s
(2001) decree (as previously cited) emphasises that design rhetoric, like all good
speeches, only comes to life when it is delivered correctly via affective physical
embodiment of the design message. The successful product provides the “stories” or
options available for consumer choice.
By combining all the research gaps found in the categories of visceral design,
consumer hedonics and product rhetoric, one large gap in knowledge emerged: the
combined area of visceral hedonic rhetoric. The visceral design, consumer hedonics
and product rhetoric categories need to be studied in combination because their
convergence provides the missing link in creating the ultimate product: the product
presenting a successfully visceral hedonic form sufficient to attract and engage a
76
consumer and offer the opportunity to reveal its functionality and reflective value. It
is necessary to investigate and gain more empirical knowledge of visceral hedonic
rhetoric in order to aid designers in developing new products. It is also necessary to
explore how visceral hedonic rhetoric may be transferable to other design domains.
By superimposing the elements of this newly defined “visceral hedonic rhetoric” on
the design dialogue framework proffered in Chapter 2, the context and position of
this study’s foci are more clearly illustrated (Figure 6). The levels of cognition have
been rotated to emphasise the sequential order of cognitive response, with “visceral”
taking the immediate place. Hedonic interpretation is highlighted as a subset of the
immediate visceral processing, and utilitarian interpretation is aligned with
behavioural cognition. Attachment and detachment affective responses are included
to signpost the consumer’s path towards an approach or avoidance action. Formation
of a consumer attachment would carry through to approach actions such as purchase,
increased frequency of use and prolonged product life. While these actions are
observable and measureable in their occurrence in everyday consumption behaviour,
theoretical feedback can also be gathered through formulated methodology
specifically targeted to isolate visceral hedonic responses. Combining both sets of
feedback, design theory is developed for the design team’s use. Rhetoric is shown as
bridging the gap between the design team and their translation of a design message
into a product.
77
Figure 6: The Placement of Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric in the Design Dialogue
(Synthesised from Cilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004; Norman, 2004; Wrigley,
Popovic and Chamorro-Koc, 2009)
6.3 Identifying Deficiencies in Current Knowledge
Figure 7 depicts the positioning of research conducted in each field in relation to the
knowledge gap of visceral hedonic rhetoric. The size of the circle represents the
magnitude of research and the level of global awareness of that research. It can be
seen from Figure 7 that there are a limited number of authors who have conducted
research that overlaps two out of the three main reviewed areas. Circles on the
outskirts of the image denote authors whose research is of minimal relevance to the
research gap.
CONTEXT OF CONSUMPTION
PRODUCER CONSUMER
RESPONSE
VISUAL REFERENCES
DESIGN TEAM
PRODUCT SENSES
ENVIRONMENTAL DISTRACTIONSBackground
Viewing time
Environment
GeometryDimensions
TexturesMaterialsColours
GraphicsDetails
Vision(Touch)(Taste)(Smell)
(Hearing)
Stereotypes Similar products Analogy Characters Conventions Cliches
A!ect Action
ORGANISATIONISSUES
CommunicationResources
Brand style
PRODUCTIONQUALITYTolerances
FinishAgeing
SENSORYCAPABILITIES
Visual acuityRange-of-vision
Colour vision
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICSAge, GenderExperiencePersonality
CULTURAL INFLUENCESTastesTrends
FashionsStyles
CIRCUMSTANTIAL FACTORSMotivation
OpportunityMarketing
Social setting
Approach
Detachment
RHETORICProduct RhetoricDesign Language
DESIGN THEORY
Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
Avoid
Hedonic
Attachment
VISCERALPhysicality
Utalitarian
BEHAVIOURALE!ectiveness of use
REFLECTIVESelf - image
Personal satisfaction
Emotional Cognition
PURCHASEINCREASED USE
PROLONGED LIFE
FEEDBACK AND CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR
78
design and emotion
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
118
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1- Norman (2004)2- Damasio (1999)3- Seliger (2008)4- Lough (2006)5- Gaver (2009)6- Kurtgozu (2002)7- Mahlke (2008)8- Gomez (2006)9- Givechi & Velaquez (2001)10- Candi (2007)11- Weinberg & Gottwald (1982)12- Bagozzi (1999)13- O’Shaughnessy (2003)14- Pennebaker (1995)15- Mountcastle (1980)16- Adam (2010)17- LeDoux (1995)18- Lim & Donaldson (2008)19- Desmet (2002)20- Meikle (2005)21- Bolchini (2009)22- Gladwell (2005)23- Melamed (2006)24- Jordan (2000)25- Crozier (1994)26- Hirschman & Holbrok (1982)27- Porter (2001)28- Crusen & Snelders (2002)
29- Hopkinson & Pujari (1982)30- Hassenzahl (2001)31- Dar & Wertenbroch (2000)32- Zheng & Kivetz (2009)33- Perina (2004)34- Buchanan (2001)35- Hekkert (2002)36- Weiman & Walter (1957)37- Erlhoff & Marshall (2007)38- Barthes (1977)39- McKeon (1987)40- Branco (2001)41- Khalid (2006)42- Vygotsky (1986)43- Neisser (2009)44- Oliveira & Sarmento (2003)45- Matthews (2002)46- Massey (2002)47- Minsky (2005)48- Calne (2000)49- Russell (2003)50- Mizerski & White (1986)51- Hirschmann & Stern (1999)52- Luce & Bettman (2001)53- Mono (1997)54- Bloch (1995)55- Crilly, Moultrie & Clarkson (2004)56- Jacobs (1999)57- Lewalski (1988)
58- Baxter (1995)59- Cupchik (1999)60- Demirbilek & Sener (2003)61- Coates (2003)62- Burns (2000)63- McDonagh-Philp (1999)64- Moles (1996)65- Solovyova (2003)66- Kurvinen (2001)67- Forlizzi & Disalvo (2002)68- Sawhney & Huntting (2007)69- Overbeeke & Hekkert (1999)70- D’Andrade & Egan (1974)71- Butter (1989)72- Routio (2003)73- Ware (2003)74- Ashby & Townsend (1986)75- Robins & Holmes (2008)76- Campbell (1987)77- Ashby & Johnson (2003)78- Savas (2001)79- Levine (2006)80- Aumer-ryan & Hartfield (2007)81- Davis (2002)82- Kress & VanLeeuwen (1996)83- Seliger (2008)84- Morgan & Starck (1999)85- Kaufer & Butler (1996)
15
31
3
41
42
43
44
4546
47
4849
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
6061
62
63
64
65
66
67
6869
70
71
72
73
74
75
7677
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
Figure 7: Literature Position Summary
79
Figure 7 demonstrates that knowledge of this topic is very general and that no
specific research has been undertaken in the area of visceral hedonic rhetoric. The
need for a stronger research emphasis on the interrelationship of visceral design,
consumer hedonics and product rhetoric – on how an individual’s emotional
responses occur in relation to visceral product properties and how that relates to
consumer hedonics – thus becomes evident.
The major gaps in the literature are identified and demonstrate that:
• the newly emerging field of design and emotion requires more investigation
to address product design and the emotional impact it can cause
• there is minimal research linking the visceral level of emotional cognition to
the realm of product design and its implications in product properties
• a tool, framework or rhetoric must be developed for use in designing for the
visceral and, specifically, for the visceral hedonic
• there is currently an absence of a universal and cross-disciplinary theory of
design rhetoric (common to all disciplines of liberal art) that can act as a post
office for transfer of theory and tools between fields
• there is no available information linking the study of visceral hedonic
behaviour to product use, consumption or purchase decisions.
6.4 Implications
Consumers develop a distinct emotional bond to certain products. The products that
share an emotional bond with consumers are said to be among their favourites.
Consumers would be more willing to repair malfunctioning products and keep them
longer if designers were able to stimulate an emotional bond between a consumer
and his or her material possession. A more sustainable society could then be
achieved by decreasing the volume of unnecessary waste generated by the premature
discard of products when consumer attachment wanes. While the main reason people
become attached to products is still up for debate (Schifferstein, Mugge and Hekkert,
2001), unless a product can appeal deeply to consumer emotions, a functional
working design will not be able to win a place in their hearts, regardless of how
80
elegant and functional its design may be (Denton, McDonagh, Baker and Wormald,
2001).
81
82
83
Chapter 7: Methodology
This Chapter introduces a qualitative research approach to eliciting user perceptions
and emotional responses to interactive products through various evaluation
techniques and product stimuli. For this purpose, a screening questionnaire and an
open-ended interview (with prompts) were employed to explore visceral hedonic
rhetoric evident in the interactive product types of mobile telephones, Mp3 players
and USB memory flash drives. This chapter discusses a review of relevant literature
concerning various methods and presents the design of this study’s visceral hedonic
rhetoric methodology.
7.1 Interactive Products
From a broader perspective, many authorities (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2008;
Popovic, 2001) have conducted research on interactive products within the design
realm; however, there is no common agreement on the definition of interactive
product. One description is that an interactive product constitutes defining the
behaviour of products and systems with which a user can interact (Brian and Lou,
1993). It can also be said that interactive products are typically products that centre
on and around complex technology systems such as software, mobile devices and
other electronic gadgets. However, it can also apply to other types of behaviour and
services involved with interaction design, which defines itself as the behaviour
(interaction) of an artefact or system in response to its users (Lim, Donaldson, Jung,
Kunz, Royer, Ramalingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman, 2008). Many authorities
have used interactive products in various ways to achieve their individual study’s
aims. A summation of this can be seen in Table 1.
84
Table 1: Interactive Product Literature Summary
Author Year Aim Methodology Summary Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer, Ramalingingam, Thirmaran, Stolterman
2008 To explore the relationship between the people’s experience and the interactive product qualities inherent in the device
• tested interactive products by giving 12 participants a disposable camera “picture journaling activity”
• tested visceral, reflective and behavioural levels of emotions in correspondence to design properties of interactive products
• participants were asked to take the camera away and photograph products to which they have a strong emotional connection
• researchers then printed the pictures and interviewed each participant about their demographic and overall impressions of the selected products to discern why they liked or valued the product. A semantic questionnaire was also employed where participants matched each product they had photographed to a series of descriptive words belonging to the 3 levels of cognition (visceral, behavioural and reflective)
Mahlke, Lindgaard
2007 To investigate audio player system properties and how they influence the perception of aesthetics and usability of interactive products
• 80 participants • portable audio players were chosen and different
versions were simulated on a computer as a three-dimensional image
• questionnaires were employed to access the scale of emotional responses experienced during each audio player simulation
Crilly, Moultrie, Clarkson
2008 To design a framework showing how designers are inspired and target different consumers by the selection of certain product forms and design methodologies
• researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 professional industrial designers holding senior positions in UK design companies
• each designer was interviewed for 75 minutes • the main question asked was “from a design
perspective why do products look the way they do?”
NB: this experiment did not specifically target interactive products but is included for its design approach and designer perspective
Mahlke, Lemke, Thuring
2007 To measure non-functional qualities that define aesthetic and symbolic aspects of interactive products
• an exemplary study of mobile telephones • 60 participants • 3 mobile telephones were used as stimuli, each
possessing the same sort of functional capabilities but differing in symbolic qualities and aesthetics
• 20 participants viewed the same mobile telephone so the participants were only exposed to one mobile telephone
• measurements of aesthetic and symbolic responses were recorded using a questionnaire with scale factors
Hassenzahl 2004 To investigated the interplay between user-perceived usability, hedonic attributes, goodness and beauty of interactive products
• 33 participants • 4 MP3 skins were used as stimuli (a skin is a
digital graphic file used to change the appearance of the MP3 application software)
• exposed to the skins, participants then rated each skin on a scale of ugly to beautiful
85
From the literature reviewed and summarised (Table 1), it was evident that many
studies generalised products, making claims about all interactive products when only
one kind or type of product was examined. Due to this, it was ascertained that in
order to make assumptions on interactive products, more than one product type needs
to be tested. If an examination of only one product, such as a mobile telephone, is
conducted, the research claims and assumptions will only be valid for mobile
telephones, not all electronic products, communication devices or interactive
products.
Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer, Ramalingingam, Thirmaran and Stolterman
(2008) used a photo journal method (where participants would use a camera to take
photos of products as a form of recording and reflecting in a journal). By allowing
participants to randomly select any product, the results included many products
outside the scope of interactive products set out by the study. If the product selection
used in the photo journal is entirely at the discretion of the participant, the results
become too broad and more difficult to compare and collect as a conglomerate. As
this study did not test each interactive product on its own, or within its product-type
definition, it had no grounds to claim that the results derived pertained to interactive
products. To make this claim, it is required that the products involved in the study
largely adhere to the definition of “interactive products” and that more than one
product is tested in order to make a valid, general conclusion (Wrigley, Popovic and
Chamorro-Koc, 2009).
7.2 Method Review
By their very nature, emotions are complex and multifaceted; thus, capturing them is
a challenge and not a simple task. Qualitative research is defined by Oliveto (2008)
as the use of unstructured exploratory techniques to understand a problem in greater
depth. Flick (2006) further points out that a qualitative approach acknowledges the
complexities of objects and phenomena in real life contexts and does not reduce
these complexities to single variables; rather, it represents them in their entirety in
everyday contexts. To test and measure emotional issues on a strictly quantitative
86
scale may be useful in some cases, but to understand emotions in greater depth,
qualitative research methods must be employed (Flick, 2006).
In order to ensure that a research study has the opportunity to achieve its aim,
appropriate methods must be selected and crafted to obtain optimal results. It is
commonly accepted that data collection for product and service evaluation is a
central challenge and that novel methodologies must be derived to make any
significant contribution to the research field (Jordan, 2000; Norman, 2004). To
produce novel research, individual methods must be selected and forged to produce
an original method for the purpose and fulfilment of the study’s unique aims. The
selection of the most suitable methodology for a particular research topic is critical to
the validity and relevance of the results (Wrigley, Gomez and Popovic, 2010).
Through the literature, it was found that a study’s results were strengthened when
real interactive products were used in the experiment. For example, in the research of
Mahlke and Lindgard (2007) and Hassenzahl (2004), a projected, simulated
computer screen image was used instead of real interactive products. This reduced
the authenticity and accuracy of visceral or behavioural responses as the study was
unable to examine the depth and tactility of a normal consumer-product interaction.
As previously discussed in relation to interactive products, it was found that
generalisation of conclusions frequently occurred; that is, only one product was
tested and the results were then generalised to all interactive products (Mahlke,
Lemke and Thuring, 2007; Mahlke, 2008). In order to prevent generalisation, a study
needs to employ a variety of examples of a product type, to enable a comparison to
be made and valid generalisation to occur.
A study conducted by Lim, Donaldson, Jung, Kunz, Royer, Ramalingingam,
Thirmaran and Stolterman (2008) examined visceral, reflective and behavioural
levels of cognition in correspondence to design properties of interactive products,
using a picture journaling activity method. The issue with this method of exploring
visceral responses, is that it was reliant upon participants categorising the three very
different and complex levels of cognition themselves, thereby removing the
immediacy of the response and allowing access to the memory-based learning
87
associated with behavioural and reflective cognition. The waters were thus muddied
and responses could no longer represent an isolated visceral response.
Norman (2004) states that, because visceral design is about initial reactions, it can be
studied quite simply by putting people in front of a design and waiting for reactions.
He also suggests that, in the best of circumstances, “the visceral reaction to
appearance works so well that people take one look and say ’I want it’. Then they
might ask ‘What does it do?’ And last ‘What does it cost?’ This is the reaction that
visceral designers strive for, and it can work” (Norman, 2004. p.68). Much of
traditional market research involves this aspect of design.
7.2.1 Screening Questionnaire
Oliveto (2008) describes a questionnaire as a series of questions structured for the
collection of data. Questionnaires can be self-completed or administered by an
interviewer and can be executed orally or in writing (Oliverto, 2008). The current use
of the questionnaire is highly instrumental, undertaken especially in the areas of
marketing and psychology but, more recently, in the field of design and emotion.
Jordan (1998) identifies two types of questionnaires: fixed response and open-ended
questionnaires. Fixed response questionnaires are especially useful for a rapid
collection of large amounts of data from sizeable population samples (Stanton,
Salmon, Walker, Baber and Jenkins, 2005). Open-ended questionnaires can be used
to pre-empt responses and emotional data, thereby forming an early base to an
experiment before the second part of the methodology (such as an observation or
interview) is introduced (de Medeiros and Ashton, 2006). Seva, Duh and Helander
(2006) applied a fixed questionnaire which tested 60 participants using an emotional
scale to gauge the pre-purchase effect of a sample of products. Questionnaires can
also be applied after an experiment to gauge participants’ responses and assess
emotions experienced during product observations in an earlier experiment (Mahlke,
Lemke and Thuring, 2007).
88
Pre-selection questionnaires or screening questionnaires can be used to assess if
participants meet all the requirements for the study, from age demographics to how
emotionally expressive they are (Smith and Ellsworth, 1985). The purpose of a
screening questionnaire is to gather information from participants; it can include
questions, prompts and scales for the participant to address in order to screen
potential participants in a study (Seva, Duh and Helander, 2006; Smith and
Ellsworth, 1985). For example, the researcher may only require participants who are
male, over 50 years of age, retired, and own a Jaguar motor vehicle in which they
seldom drive. This information can be extracted through the employment of a
screening questionnaire.
7.2.2 Interview Method
Interviews are founded on the idea of conversations and as a research method they
generally involve a face-to-face discussion between two people, guided by a set of
pre-determined questions (Gubrium and Holstein, 2002). The social sciences have a
long history of utilising interview methods for a variety of purposes (Robson, 2002;
Gubrium and Holstein, 2002). The flexibility of the interview method allows it to be
applied in many circumstances; thus, it has been used to investigate a range of topics
in the design sphere including usability concerns, user attitudes, perceptions and
reactions, error rates, and other aspects of user-product interaction (Robson, 2002).
Interviews are generally characterised as structured, semi-structured, unstructured or
open-ended (Robson, 2002). A structured interview is effectively a questionnaire
with a highly structured format, and the possible responses are limited. In a semi-
structured interview, the questions are more open and less controlled and the
participant has much more flexibility in their responses. Finally, an open-ended
interview is a free-flowing conversation based around the general topic of the
interview (Preece, Rogers and Sharp, 2002).
Structured interviews are useful when the aims of the study are well established.
They are particularly valuable if time is a concern as they can be performed quickly
and methodically. On the other hand, open-ended and semi-structured interviews can
89
often take time to perform but generate rich and complex data (Preece, Rogers and
Sharp, 2002). As a result, semi-structured and open-ended interviews have been
effectively used in the field of design to explore questions relating to people’s
thoughts, beliefs, attitudes and emotional feelings. For instance, Desmet, Overbeeke
and Tax (2001) conducted a study to assist the design of products with added
emotional value. In this study, a technique termed the “emocard interview” was used
to assess the emotional response to existing mobile telephone designs. This was
followed by an open-ended interview where participants’ attitudes and use of mobile
telephones were discussed. Jordan (1998) also utilised semi-structured interviews to
explore the “pleasurable” qualities of products. During the interview, the participants
were asked questions regarding the feelings they associated with the products,
aspects of the product that related to these feelings, and the effects of pleasure on
future purchase behaviour. Through the investigation, Jordan (1998) was able to
identify a set of emotional qualities associated with products in relation to pleasure
and displeasure. The examples above highlight the effectiveness of interviews in
exploring issues relating to emotions in design.
7.3 Methodology Approach and Design
How a researcher determines an approach to a research problem depends on the
researcher’s personal positions concerning ways of creating new knowledge (Zhao,
Popovic, Ferreira and Xiaobo, 2008). This study uses qualitative methods to pursue
the research aims and objectives. By employing appropriate qualitative research
methods and techniques, the study aims to reach a better understanding of people,
their experiences and what they value emotionally (Wrigley, Gomez and Popovic,
2010).
Specifically, the experiment was designed to meet the two research objectives set at
the beginning of the study. These are to identify:
a) visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in designed interactive products; and
b) the difference between visceral rhetoric and visceral hedonic rhetoric.
90
To be able to reach these set objectives, the method of an open-ended interview with
prompts was selected, developed and employed in the study. The literature review
previously discussed highlights the fact that interviews have been effectively
employed to uncover emotional aspects of a consumer-product relationship.
The screening questionnaire technique was used to gather a participant pool who
demonstrated familiarity and a base frequency of use with interactive products. This
was followed by an open-ended interview with prompts which gathered verbal data
for later translation into textual data via transcription. The textual data in the form of
transcripts would later allow for their use in the analysis stages. Visual data from the
open-ended interview was recorded to match participants’ responses to the correct
corresponding product prompts, as well as to enrich the validity of the experiment.
This study was designed to explore visceral hedonic rhetoric involved in the design
of interactive products. To investigate such issues, the study was organised into four
stages: 1) data collection, 2) data analysis, 3) findings, and 4) conclusions. These
stages are detailed in the research plan (Figure 8).
The first stage is comprised of the pilot study and the main data collection phase. The
pilot study was conducted using six participants in order to validate the selected
research methods and develop the initial coding scheme. It also acted as a guide and
improved the future data collection, collation and analysis involved in the main
experiment. The findings from the pilot study helped refine and improve the
qualitative methods in the main experiment. The data collection methods used in the
main study were thus a refined version of the screening questionnaire and an open-
ended interview methodology trialled in the pilot study.
The second stage was the analysis of the experimental data. Transcribed verbal data
was used to identify visceral hedonic responses given by participants in response to
the product stimuli. A coding scheme was derived for each of the visceral and
hedonic definitions arising from the literature. This was applied to the responses to
categorise their applicability.
91
Figure 8: Methodology Plan
In the third stage, the categorised responses were quantified and analysed and
visceral responses and visceral hedonic responses were compared. Through
continuous comparing and interpretation, it was possible to produce corresponding
relationships between responses to certain product attributes with a view to the
development of a visceral hedonic rhetoric. Further details on the procedure involved
in the analysis stage will be discussed in detail in Chapter 8.
Based on the synthesis of the relationships and results, the fourth stage uncovered the
study’s findings and conclusions. Further discussion and interpretation of the results
highlighted the study’s significance and detailed future work.
Pilot Study
Main Study
Data Collection
- Validate Research Method
- Screening Questionnaire
- Open-Ended Interview With Prompts
Verbal DataData Analysis
- Coding Scheme
- Identify Visceral Rhetoric Data
- Separate Hedonic Data
Visceral Rhetoric
Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
Results- Compare
- Interpret
- Relationships
ImplicationsDiscussion
Conclusions
- Findings
- Signi!cance And Contribution
- Recommendations And Implications
- Future Work
Textual Data
92
7.4 Data Collection Procedures
All experiments took place in the People and Systems Laboratory located at the
Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. The data collection
process aimed to obtain instantaneous visceral reactions from participants in
response to product prompts or stimuli to which they were exposed. The verbal data
were recorded, transcribed and analysed. The software program Atlas.ti aided the
analysis of data where the study’s coding scheme was applied. This produced the
visceral hedonic rhetoric results detailed in Chapter 8.
7.4.1 Participants
This study gathered responses from thirty participants aged between 18 and 24. This
target age group was determined by a variety of factors: firstly, there was the high
usage rate of interactive products observed in consumers of this age bracket (Desmet,
Overbeeke and Tax, 2001; Axelsson, 2010); secondly, amongst all consumers, the
age bracket of 18–24 year olds represents an age where disposable income, endless
credit options and buying power allow them to be the most frequent purchasers of
interactive devices (Brian and Lou, 1993; McNeal, 1993; Axelsson, 2010). The
number of participants (thirty) was decided based on qualitative analysis methods
used in other product design research studies (Blackler, 2008; Morse, 1994; Zhao,
Popovic, Ferreira and Xiaobo, 2008; Beaver, 2010).
The recruiting process was divided into two stages. In the first recruiting stage, the
participants were sought using the social network of the researcher. This then
evolved into sequential sampling (Patton, 2002), where Participant A would ask
another acquaintance to participate in the study, thus assisting in the recruitment
process. The second stage of recruitment was to advertise for participants from
within or outside of the university. This was achieved by using a recruitment email
asking for assistance and voluntary participation. Acceptance was followed up by the
participant information pack (Appendix A).
93
7.4.2 Screening Questionnaire
The screening questionnaire was employed to gather demographic information
pertaining to the participants’ suitability for the study. While participants were
screened for age, profession, nationality, frequency of use, gender, ownership and
level of expertise in use of the product, age bracket was the dominant criterion for
inclusion. Some of the information gathered in the screening questionnaire was later
found to be immaterial to the result; however, it did demonstrate involvement of a
representative sample of the community. The basic age and demographic
requirements to be involved in the study were advertised as part of the recruitment
process; thus, only suitable candidates applied. This meant there was no need to
refuse anyone from participating in the study; however it was useful to double check
suitability and prevent an unsuitable participant proceeding with the experiment. The
purpose was to gather information about the participants’ demographics and
background, as well as to ascertain how familiar they were with the selected
interactive products used in the study (Appendix B).
7.4.3 Prompts or Stimuli
Three different types of products were used as stimuli or prompts in the study:
mobile telephones, MP3 players and USB memory flash drives. Six different
products of each product type were involved. This was based upon the interactive
product literature review (Table 1). These product types were selected because they
fell under the classification of interactive products that are used frequently by the
targeted demographic (Hassenzahl, 2004; Axelsson, 2010). All products were
presented as real life, off the shelf items, as opposed to photographs, drawings or
images, as used by some studies discussed earlier in the chapter (Yamamoto and
Lambert, 1994). Figures 9, 10 and 11 illustrate the interactive products that were
presented to the participants; these were laid out exactly in the positions illustrated in
the figures. They were without fail presented in this order, spread out on a white
piece of foam core board to retain consistency throughout all experiments. Each
device was covered with an identical white box. Participants were then invited to
reveal and view the products in any order and at their own discretion. Consistency in
display was maintained to ensure the random order of exposure was determined by
94
the individual participant. For example, participants could view the first product type
(mobile telephones) from left to right, the second product type (MP3 players) right to
left and the third product type (USB memory flash drives) from the middle out, if
they so wished. The selection of white core board and boxes was a deliberate attempt
to minimise the influences or distractions in the consumer-product interaction
environment and to maintain a stable environment from one participant to the next. A
constraint was that participants were not allowed to touch or pick up the product in
any way. This was established in the light of Norman’s (2004) definition of a visceral
response: an instantaneous reaction to a product’s appearance.
Figure 9: Mobile Telephone Stimuli/ Prompts
Figure 10: MP3 Player Stimuli/ Prompts
Figure 11: USB Memory Flash Drive Stimuli/Prompts
95
7.4.4 Open-Ended Interview with Prompts
The method of an open-ended interview using product stimuli as prompts was
derived from the literature discussed at the beginning of the chapter. It was
developed further from the methods reviewed in the literature by the use of three
different sets of interactive products as prompts and stimuli. Table 2 describes the
experiment procedure as well as the method and materials used. At the beginning of
the experiment, a card with two short questions was placed in front of the participant
(Appendix C) to maintain focus and purpose throughout the course of the experiment
and to reduce the need to access memory-based cognitive processing which could
distract from the visceral response. The questions were: Do you like the product? and
What about the product do you like or dislike? These questions were to be answered
by the participant after each product was exposed.
Table 2: Experiment Summary
Experiment Objective • To identify visceral product properties evident in interactive products Setting • People and Systems Laboratory (PAS Lab), D Block, Queensland University of
Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, Australia. Time • 20 minutes Methods • Open-Ended Interview with Prompts Data collection
• Using the digital video cameras and recorders in the research laboratory
Experiment • Six interactive products were placed on a white board covered by white boxes concealing the stimuli products
• The participant took the boxes off and was exposed to a product for the duration exposure time of 2 seconds
• The participant was NOT allowed to touch or pick the products up in any way • Each participant was asked a series of questions pertaining to what their first
instinct of the product was. -What is your first reaction to the product? -What is the first thing that comes to mind? -Do you like it? -Why?
• Each participant was asked to respond very quickly and the responses recorded Analysis tool • Atlas.ti was used to analyse the textual and verbal data
Participants • 30 participants aged between 18 and 24, spanning genders, cultures and levels of expertise
Materials • 6 mobile telephones stimuli • 6 USB memory stick stimuli • 6 MP3 player stimuli • 6 white box covers to hide each set of stimuli
96
The experiment was designed to extract and collect data on the participants’ visceral
responses. As defined earlier in Chapter 3, a visceral response is an immediate
instinct by which a consumer reacts to the sensory aspects of a product. Therefore,
the allowed product exposure time was an important factor in the experiment to
restrict retrieved responses to the instantaneous visceral variety. As the participants
needed time to verbalise their responses, a short exposure time of two seconds was
selected, allowing for the participant to view the product stimuli and formulate a
response without censorship. Lindgaard, Fernandes, Dudek and Brown (2006)
conducted a study to ascertain how quickly people form an opinion about web page
visual appeal. The results showed that visual appeal could be assessed within 50 ms,
suggesting that web designers have about 50 ms to make a good first impression on
the consumer. However, the study’s method used a nine point numerical rating scale
to collect satisfaction data from participants without asking for any verbalisation or
justification. Blackler (2008) used a five second timeframe for responses in a task-
orientated activity involving the programming of a microwave. The two seconds
allowed in this study was felt to provide the participants with enough time to take in
the product, but to also articulate a verbal response immediately after exposure.
Figure 12: Participant Being Exposed to Product Prompts/Stimuli
97
Figure 12 illustrates the experiment in progress in which a participant is being
exposed to one of the mobile telephones. The mobile telephone is about to be taken
out of sight and the participant’s responses recorded. As described earlier, the six
interactive products were presented in line on a white piece of foam core board, in
the same order as shown in Figures 9, 10 and 11. In Figure 12, the participant has
already viewed four of the six mobile telephones and moved the empty boxes out of
the original line in which they were presented. The white boxes covering the
products were placed over the product prompts or stimuli to hide the other products
so that only one product was visible at any given time. This isolation of product
exposure aimed to avoid participants making comparative judgements between
products. The participants uncovered the products at random and in their own time.
7.5 Summary
This Chapter highlights a variety of research methods for examining and using
interactive products. It describes the selected screening questionnaire technique and
the open-ended interview with prompts method as well as the reasons for their
selection for use in this study. Also presented is a review of corresponding literature
to support the chosen product classification of interactive products. The study’s
research design, which aims to identify and explore visceral hedonic rhetoric evident
in the design of interactive products, is outlined in detail. The methodology design
consisted of a screening questionnaire technique and open-ended interview method
using product prompts as stimuli. Both were tried and tested in the pilot study to
improve and refine the final procedure. The physical product stimuli of mobile
telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory flash drives and the procedure involved
with exposing the participant are also explained. The procedure and participants
involved in the data collection are detailed, justified and discussed. The next chapter
describes and details the analysis stage that was applied to the data collected using
the methodology outlined in this chapter.
98
99
Chapter 8: Analysis and Results
This chapter first interprets and defines the analysis used to produce the results of the
study. The codes and the analysis process used to identify visceral responses, visceral
hedonic responses and the relationships between them (as evident in interactive
products) are described. Secondly, the results generated from the data analysis
pertaining to visceral rhetoric and visceral hedonic rhetoric are described, collated
and compared. As discussed in the previous chapter, the study involved thirty
participants, three different types of interactive products, and six of each product
type. This equates to five hundred and forty responses being analysed to produce the
results. Results pertaining to all three types of interactive products (mobile
telephones, MP3 players and USB memory flash drives) and the relationships
between these results are then explored in further detail.
8.1 The Coding Scheme
The coding scheme and procedure are vital to establishing a consistent and even
framework to analyse data. Crucial to the analysis stage is the consistent
identification and classification of participant responses throughout the data collected
(Appendix E). As the research questions state, visceral hedonic rhetoric was the
target of this investigation. Codes emerged from the data through an iterative process
of analysis that revealed two stages of coding referred to as “visceral rhetoric
coding” (Table 3) and “hedonic coding” (Table 4). The visceral rhetoric coding
scheme is detailed and described in Table 3. The fourteen codes that the responses
related to were (in alphabetical order): analogy, brand, colour, gender, intrigue,
material, novelty, perceived function, perceived usability, portability, quality, shape,
size and texture. A definition and example of each code and the sub-code is also
supplied.
100
Table 3: Visceral Rhetoric Coding Scheme
Code Sub-Codes Definition Examples
Analogy Organic shaped objects Familiar to other interactive products Familiar to other general products Fashion accessories
A similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based; a resemblance
It looks like a toy It looks like a piece of jewellery It reminds me of a candy bar
Brand Familiarity Confidence Uncertainty
A name or trademark associated with a product or producer
I like Nokias That is an Apple product
Colour Contrast Perception Vibrancy
Variation of light reflected by an object, usually determined visually by measurement of hue, and brightness of the reflected light saturation of a chroma
I like the colour The colour red is nice and vibrant I don’t like the colour scheme
Gender Unisex Masculine Feminine
Association with a certain gender
That is cute and girly It is pink and a girls phone
Intrigue Attention Difference Curiosity
Arousal of curiosity or interest by unusual, new or otherwise fascinating or compelling qualities
Wow that looks interesting I would be interested to see how it works
Material Finish Substance
The substances of which a product is made or composed
I don’t like the see through plastic I liked the brushed metal look
Novelty Modern Futuristic Outdated
Of recent origin, production or purchase; newness
It looks old and out dated Looks new and futuristic
Perceived Function
Appearance of functionality Physical features Non-physical features Multiplicity of functions
The kind of action or activity proper to a person or thing; the purpose for which something is designed
I hate slide phones Looks multi-functional
Perceived Usability
Product confidence Ergonomics Product frustration
Awareness or suggestion of the product’s aspects of use
I don’t know how to use it It looks simple to use
Portability Convenience Compact design Wearability
Capability of being transported or conveyed
Easy to run with Put it in your pocket
Quality Reliability Durability
Grade or excellence in the make Looks like it would break easily Susceptible to damage
Shape Proportion Fluidity Geometry
The quality of a distinct object or body in having an external surface or outline; of specific form or figure
It looks too chunky It has a different shape
Size Bulk Smallness Weight
An object’s spatial dimensions, proportions, magnitude or bulk
It is too small It is very thin
Texture Utilitarian Decorative
The visual and (especially) tactile quality of a surface
It has a rubbery back for good grip
101
The transcripts (Appendix E) were coded or categorised using the software program
Atlas.ti to allow for an organised data comparison and analysis. By applying the
visceral rhetoric coding scheme to the data, results emerged pertaining to the
participants’ visceral responses to the interactive product stimuli. These results will
be discussed later in this chapter. The sub-codes were not analysed any further due to
an insufficient sample size of only six different products or stimuli (Appendix F).
Once the visceral rhetoric coding scheme was applied, a secondary hedonic coding
scheme (Table 4) was also applied in order to separate the data into visceral rhetoric
and visceral hedonic rhetoric results. The main difference between the two is that
visceral responses are all the participant responses (positive or negative) to the
product stimuli and visceral hedonic rhetoric results are the participants’ positive
responses only. Table 4 outlines the hedonic coding scheme, providing definitions
and examples of each code.
Table 4: Hedonic Coding Scheme
Code Definition Examples
Aesthetic A positive response given to the look and style of the product
It looks very attractive That one is very cute
Confident A positive response given in regards to how confident the participant would be using the product
I like Nokias That is an Apple product
Emotive A positive emotional response in regards to how the participant feels about the product
I like that one I trust Nokias
Interested A positive response showing interest in the product
Wow! That is an interesting one
Slightly Positive
A slightly positive response given by the participant in regards to the overall product
I don’t mind that one… It works
Strongly Positive
A strong positive response given by the participant in regards to the overall product
Yes, it has a nice shape to it
Table 5 demonstrates how the visceral rhetoric codes were attached to the data based
on the definition of the codes presented in Table 3. The product stimuli code refers to
102
which product the participant was being exposed to at the time of the response. For
example, mobile telephone Number Five (MT 5) was presented to the participant and
their response was: “First thing I see is pink, girls’ phone. It’s a flip phone; it’s one
of the functions. Screen on the front probably going to display time; stuff like that”.
From this, the code “Colour” was attached within the response to pink, as pink is a
colour. Also, the sub-code of “Perception” was attached, as pink was the
participant’s perception of colour.
Table 5: Visceral Rhetoric Coding Scheme Application
Product Stimuli Code Excerpt of Transcript Codes Sub-Codes
MT 5: First thing I see is pink girls phone. It’s a flip phone, it’s one of the functions. Screen on the front probably going to display time, stuff like that.
Colour, Gender Perceived Function Perceived Usability
Colour [Perception], Gender[Feminie] Perceived Function[Physical feature] Perceived Usability[Frustration]
MT 4: Bulky, cumbersome, buttons aren’t in a normal layout. Nokia obviously. Odd shape not the standard rectangle.
Size, Perceived Usability Brand Shape
Size[Big], Perceived Usability[Frustration] Brand[Familiarity] Shape[Proportion]
Table 6 illustrates how the hedonic codes were attached to the data based on the
definition of the codes presented in Table 4. The product stimuli code refers to which
product the participant was being exposed to at the time of the response. For
example, mp3 player Number Six (MP3 6) was presented to the participant and their
response was: “Yeah I like the texture even though I didn’t touch it you can see that
it’s matt. Shape was interesting. Screen a little bit small assuming if it’s black and
white”. From this the code Texture was already attached within the response to
texture, from the visceral rhetoric coding scheme. This allowed the hedonic coding
scheme to focus on what type of hedonic response the participant gave. This can be
seen by the application of +Texture [emotive] code to the response, “Yeah I like the
texture even though I didn’t touch it” (Appendix G).
103
Table 6: Hedonic Coding Scheme Application
Product Stimuli Code Excerpt of Transcript Codes
MP3 6: Yeah I like the texture even though I didn’t touch it you can see that it’s matt. Shape was interesting. Screen a little bit small assuming if its black and white.
+Texture [Emotive] +Material [Emotive] +Shape [Interest]
USB 4: Interesting design. I actually like that, um. I don’t know it’s different the rounded bevelled edges and it was thin. A lot thinner than normal USB so I’m assuming it has a slider that comes out for the USB slot.
+Shape [Emotive] +Size [Emotive] +Size [Emotive] +Perceived Function [Emotive]
All the participants’ visceral responses were coded and then quantified. This was
done on the understanding that visceral responses are sensory aspects of a product’s
appearance; for example, colour, texture, shape and sound (Meikle, 2005). The data
could then be separated into the three various product types (mobile telephone, MP3
player and USB memory flash drive) or used as a conglomerate. From this, a
hierarchy of codes was established (Appendix H) by the use of Atlas.ti to quantify
the occurrence rate of each visceral response and visceral hedonic response, and
ranking them accordingly. As each participant was exposed to six different products
within three different product categories, it meant that all thirty participants were
exposed to eighteen different interactive products, producing five hundred and forty
responses to analyse.
8.2 Relationship Coding
In addition to the standalone frequency of concurrent visceral responses, data was
also analysed (using the Atlas.ti program) to suggest that the concurrence of
relationships between different visceral responses was an important part of the
results. When participants mentioned two codes concurrently in the same response, it
was noted that the two codes had a relationship (Table 7 and Appendix I). From this
evaluation, seven relationships were discovered and these are discussed further in
Chapters 9 and 10. Table 7 depicts the relationship coding scheme by defining each
code and providing an example.
104
Table 7: Relationship Coding Scheme
Relationship Definition Example
Colour + Intrigue The vibrancy of the colour created participant attention, causing intrigue
Wow! I love the colour
Colour + Gender Colour and Gender have a strong association as they were frequently referenced together
It’s pink, it looks like a girls phone
Brand + Perceived Usability
Confidence was expressed in the product both through the usability and brand associations
I love Nokias, they work for me
Brand + Analogy The familiarity to other products included the association of the brand
It reminds me of the ipod
Analogy + Shape The analogy of various shaped products
Looks like a pebble
Quality + Novelty Both have a strong association with longevity
Looks new and durable
Perceived Usability + Perceived Function
Perception of ease of use and function Looks very functional and easy to use
Using the already coded and analysed data, additional coding to highlight concurrent
visceral responses was applied. Table 8 illustrates how the relationship codes were
attached to the data based on the definition of the codes presented in Table 7. For
example, mobile telephone Number Five (MT 5) was presented to the participant and
their response was: “It’s very girlish, just the colours. I saw a bit of pink on it, just
with the white. Again it looks a little bit ancient. It was a very good looking phone
just not suited to me”. From this, the visceral rhetoric codes of Colour and Gender
were already applied. This created the relationship code of Colour + Gender.
Table 8: Relationship Coding Scheme Application
Product Stimuli Code
Excerpt of Transcript Visceral Rhetoric Codes
Relationship Code
MT5 It’s very girlish, just the colours. I saw a bit of pink on it, just with the white. Again it looks a little bit ancient. It was a very good looking phone just not suited to me.
Gender [Feminine] Colour [Perception] Novelty [Outdated]
Relationship [Colour + Gender]
USB6
Very practical design. That would probably be my pick only because it has got a protective cover on the USB. I am more about ensuring the proper use of it and the clear plastic cover it always makes sure nothing can get into the USB port.
Perceived Usability [Product Confidence] Perceived Function [Physical Features] Material [Substance] Perceived Usability [Product Confidence]
Relationship [Perceived Usability + Perceived Function]
105
8.3 Results
By applying these coding schemes to the data collected, the results of this study
emerged. The results can be separated into two main categories of (i) visceral
response and (ii) visceral hedonic response. From each of these main categories,
emerge different results pertaining to each of the three different interactive product
types used as stimuli (mobile telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory flash
drives). They are illustrated in Figure 13, providing an overall visual summary of the
results reported on in the following pages.
Figure 13: Overall Results Categories
8.4 Visceral Rhetoric
After the completion of the analysis, the visceral responses that emerged were: size,
shape, colour, brand, gender, intrigue, quality, texture, perceived usability, material,
analogy, portability, novelty and perceived function. These categories were initially
noted from the instantaneous responses given by the participants during the pilot
study, and then applied to responses received during the main study’s interview
process (Figure 12). Each of thirty participants was exposed to eighteen products.
This resulted in a total of five hundred and forty responses being analysed to produce
the following graphs which show occurrence rate percentages.
Visceral Responses Visceral Hedonic Responses
mp3 players USB memory !ash drives
mobile telephones mp3 players USB memory
!ash drivesmobile
telephones
106
Figure 14: Overall Visceral Responses
The results illustrated in Figure 14 show the distribution of visceral responses in
regards to their occurrence frequencies in response to exposure to the 18 interactive
products as a whole. From the results shown, Size is the most dominant response
(13.8%), followed closely by Colour (13.2%). Perceived usability (12.3%) and
Shape (12.2%) closely follow Size and Colour in occurrence. Analogy (7.7%),
Perceived function (7.4%) and Material (7.1%) are all close in scores. Intrigue
(6.0%), Portability (5.9%) and Novelty (4.5%) then follow. Quality (3.5%) and
Brand (2.7%) come in close behind. Texture (1.9%) and Gender (1.8%) are also very
close in scores, holding the lowest two places.
Visceral responses to each of the three different interactive products (mobile
telephones, MP3 players and USB memory flash drives) were then calculated. The
following is a breakdown of responses to each individual product type (Figures 15,
17 and 18).
0
5
10
15
20
25%O
ccur
renc
es
107
Figure 15: Visceral Responses to Mobile Telephones
Figure 15 shows that Colour (19.2%) is the dominant leader in visceral rhetoric with
regard to mobile telephones. It stands out significantly from the other categories. The
next most dominant aspect is Shape (13.5%). Perceived usability (11.7%) is next,
followed by Size (9.2%), Perceived function (9.0%) and Material (8.2%); all of these
are close in scoring range. Novelty (5.9%) and Intrigue (5.3%) follow closely in
occurrence rate. Gender and Analogy are both recorded with the same frequency of
occurrence rate of 3.9%. Texture (3.2%) is next, followed by Portability (2.7%) and
Brand (2.4%), which are also similar in percentage rate. Quality (1.9%) has the
lowest visceral rhetoric frequency of occurrence rate for mobile telephones.
0
5
10
15
20
25
%O
ccur
renc
es
108
%O
ccur
renc
es
Figure 16: Visceral Responses to MP3 Players
Figure 16 shows that the visceral rhetoric responses to MP3 players resulted in a
leading dominant group of three categories: Size (16.0%), Perceived usability
(15.6%) and Shape (14.2%). These are followed by another group of close results:
Analogy (10.6%) and Colour (10.0%). Next is Portability (7.0%), followed by
Intrigue (5.6%) and Brand (5.2%), which are relatively close together in occurrence
rate. Perceived Function (4.2%) comes in next, followed by results for Material
(3.6%) and Novelty (3.4%), which are also close in percentage rates. Quality (2.2%)
is next, followed by Texture (1.8%). Gender (0.6%) is the lowest visceral rhetoric
result evident for Mp3 players.
0
5
10
15
20
25
109
Figure 18: Visceral Responses to USB Memory Flash Drives
Figure 18 depicts the results of visceral rhetoric responses to USB memory flash
drives. Size (16.7%) is the predominant category with no other coming close to it. A
rather large secondary grouping of results include: Colour (10.0%), Material (9.6%),
Perceived usability (9.4%), Perceived function (9.1%), Analogy (8.9%), Shape
(8.4%), Portability (8.0%) and Intrigue (7.5%). Next is Quality (6.2%) and Novelty
(4.2%). This is followed by Texture (0.9%) and Gender (0.9%), both with the same
occurrence rate. Brand (0.2%) has the lowest visceral rhetoric frequency of
occurrence rate for USB memory flash drives.
0
5
10
15
20
25
%O
ccur
renc
es
110
Figure 18: Visceral Responses to All Products
As seen in Figure 18, the three interactive products were compared. The results from
this graph depict the commonalities in frequency of occurrence rates for each product
code, such as Texture, Novelty, Intrigue and Gender. The largest difference apparent
is that responses to mobile telephones result in Colour-related responses, having
twice the occurrence rate of those recorded for the MP3 player and the USB memory
flash drive. Additionally, the Perceived usability is stronger in MP3 players than in
the other two interactive product types. Texture, Novelty, Intrigue and Gender are all
similar in occurrence rate across the three products which scored relatively low for
all three. Results suggest that Colour is the most powerful visceral attribute in mobile
telephone design with the highest occurrence rate of 19.2%, and that MP3 players
project a heightened sense of Perceived usability. It also demonstrates that Quality is
strongest in the USB responses, which could be due to the nature of the device and
the importance of data safety to users.
0
5
10
15
20
25
mobiletelephones mp3players usbmemoryflashdrives
%O
ccur
renc
es
111
8.5 Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
From the visceral responses seen earlier in the chapter, it was possible to categorise
the responses more specifically into visceral hedonic responses. The process of this
further categorisation or coding was detailed earlier in the analysis section. The
following graphs represent the results.
Figure 20: Overall Visceral Hedonic Results
The findings demonstrated in Figure 20 represent the overall visceral hedonic
responses in correspondence to their occurrence rate. From the results shown, Colour
is the most dominant response (16.4%), followed by Size (14.4%) and Shape
(11.8%). Intrigue (9.9%) and Material (8.5%) are closely ranked. Perceived usability
(7.7%), Portability (7.5%) and Perceived Function (6.9%) are all close in scores,
following the dominant scores above. Novelty (4.7%) and Analogy (4.3%) are fairly
close in occurrence rates, as are Brand (2.6%) and Quality (2.3%). Texture (2.1%)
and Gender (0.9%) are, again, also very close together in scores and hold the two
lowest places (as seen in Figures 14 and 17).
0
5
10
15
20
25
% O
ccur
renc
es
112
In addition to the conglomerate result, results pertaining to each of the three
interactive product types (mobile telephone, MP3 player and USB memory flash
drive) were also produced. Results for the first product type, mobile telephones, can
be seen in Figure 21.
Figure 21: Visceral Hedonic Responses to Mobile Telephones
From the results shown in Figure 21, it can be seen that Colour (22.5%) is almost
double the rate of the second highest score Material (12.6%), with Size and Shape
having identical scores of 9.3%. These are followed by Novelty (8.2%) and, again,
Perceived function and Intrigue have identical scores of 7.7%. Portability (6.0%),
Perceived Usability (3.9%) and Texture (3.3%) are fairly close in occurrence rates.
Next come Quality (2.8%), Brand (2.8%) and Gender (2.8%) which all recorded the
same percentage rate. Last is Analogy (1.1%) with the lowest visceral hedonic
response frequency of occurrence rate evident for mobile telephones.
0
5
10
15
20
25
% O
ccur
renc
es
113
Figure 21: Visceral Hedonic Responses to MP3 Players
As shown in Figure 21, MP3 players and the corresponding responses to visceral
hedonic stimuli present three dominant results: Size at 16.0% and Colour and Shape
with identical occurrence rates of 15.7%. These are followed by Perceived Usability
(9.5%), Portability (8.3%) and Intrigue (7.4%). Material (6.5%) and Analogy (6.1%)
are relatively close in occurrence rate. Next are Brand (4.4%) and Novelty (3.5%).
These are followed by Perceived Function and Texture, both receiving 2.6%
occurrence rates. Finally, Quality records 1.7% and Gender receives 0%.
0
5
10
15
20
25
% O
ccur
renc
es
114
Figure 22: Visceral Hedonic Responses to USB Memory Flash Drives
Figure 22 illustrates that USB memory flash drives produced the following visceral
hedonic responses: Size (16.2%) and Intrigue (15.2%) are the two highest scoring
results, with Colour (11.7%) and Perceived function (11.2%) close behind; Shape
(9.7%) and Perceived usability (9.1%) follow; Portability (8.1%) and Material
(7.1%) follow closely behind and Analogy (5.1%), Novelty (3.1%) and Quality
(2.5%) are next; Texture and Brand receive the same occurrence rate of 0.5% and
Gender, again, receives 0%.
0
5
10
15
20
25
% O
ccur
renc
es
115
Figure 23: Visceral Hedonic Responses to All Products
By comparing all of the product types, the differences in visceral hedonic response
are evident (Figure 23) and will be discussed in the next chapter. However, the result
for Colour in mobile telephones (22.5%) is the most dominant in occurrence rate,
greater than the rate for Mp3 players (15.6%) and USB memory flash drives
(11.6%).
0
5
10
15
20
25
mobiletelephones mp3players usbmemoryflashdrives
% O
ccur
renc
es
116
Figure 24: Compared Conglomerate Responses
Comparing the overall visceral and visceral hedonic responses as percentages of the
overall responses demonstrates their differences (Figure 24). The more marked
differences are that Intrigue, Colour and, to a lesser degree, Material have a higher
occurrence rate hedonically, while Perceived usability and Analogy report a weaker
score hedonically. Apart from these main differences, the rest are similar in score
rates.
0
5
10
15
20
25
visceralresponse visceralhedonicresponse
%Occurrences
117
8.6 Relationships
Additional to the hierarchy of results in visceral responses and visceral hedonic
responses, the emergence of relationships between categories is described in Table 9.
Figure 25 illustrates that the relationships have emerged from the previously
described results as a conglomerate. Once the relationships were discovered, they
were then broken down into their corresponding interactive product categories
(mobile telephone, Mp3 player and USB memory flash drive).
Figure 25: Overall Relationship Result Categories
Visceral Responses Visceral Hedonic Responses
mp3 players USB memory !ash drives
mobile telephones mp3 players USB memory
!ash drivesmobile
telephones
mp3 players USB memory !ash drives
mobile telephones
Relationships
118
Table 9: Hierarchy of Relationships
Hierarchy Frequency Relationship Definition
1 27.6% Perceived Usability + Perceived Function
Perception of ease of use and function
2 17.0% Colour + Intrigue The vibrancy of the colour created participant attention, causing intrigue
3 15.9% Analogy + Shape The analogy of various shaped products 4 14.8% Brand + Analogy The familiarity with other products included
the association of the brand 5 12.7% Colour + Gender Colour and Gender have a strong association
as they were frequently referenced together 6 9.5% Brand + Perceived
Usability Confidence was expressed in the product both through the usability and brand associations
7 2.1% Quality + Novelty Both have a strong association with longevity
In Table 9, the relationships between product attributes are shown in correspondence
to the percentage frequency of occurrence within the results. This provides the ability
to rank the conglomerate results from highest to lowest frequency of occurrence. As
can be seen, the highest ranking relationship is Perceived Function + Perceived
Usability with a frequency of occurrence rate of 27.6%. This relationship reflects
responses that contained references to the participants’ perception of how easy the
product would be to use. The second highest ranking relationship is Colour +
Intrigue, with a frequency of occurrence rate of 17.0%. This relationship was
generally a result of the vibrancy of the colour grabbing the attention of the
participant and, in turn, creating intrigue in the product. The third ranking
relationship is Analogy + Shape, with a frequency of occurrence rate of 15.9%. This
relationship was constructed by participants referring to the similarity of various
shaped objects. The fourth highest-ranking relationship is Brand + Analogy, scoring
14.8% in frequency of occurrence. It was the familiarity to other products and their
branding that demonstrated this relationship. The fifth relationship ranking is Colour
+ Gender, with a 12.7% frequency of occurrence rate. This relationship included the
stereotypical gender/colour associations. The sixth ranking relationship is Brand +
Perceived Usability, scoring 9.5% frequency of occurrence rate. This relationship
was formed by responses expressing confidence in the brand and, therefore, its
usability. The lowest ranking relationship is Quality + Novelty, ranking seventh and
scoring 2.1% frequency of occurrence rate. This relationship was associated with
longevity through the quality and novelty of the product.
119
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Shape + Analogy
Analogy + Brand
Brand + Perceived Usability
Colour + Gender
Colour + Intrigue
Perceived Usability + Perceived Function
Quality + Novelty
Conglomerate Mobile Telephone Mp3 Player USB memory flash drive
Figure 26: Compared Conglomerate Responses
As shown in Figure 26, a comparison was made between the frequency of occurrence
rates in relationships from one product to the next (mobile telephones, Mp3 players,
USB memory flash drives) in comparison to the conglomerate occurrence frequency.
As can be seen, Mp3 players show significantly stronger responses in the relationship
between Shape + Analogy (66.7%), Analogy + Brand (78.6%) and Brand +
Perceived Usability (66.7%) compared to both of the other products. Mobile
telephones are higher in frequency of occurrence rate in both relationships
concerning Colour: Colour + Intrigue (37.5%) and Colour + Gender (75.0%). In the
relationships of Analogy + Brand, Brand + Perceived Usability and Colour + Gender,
the USB memory flash drive is absent, with a 0% occurrence rate. Interestingly
enough, the highest conglomerate ranking relationship (Perceived Usability +
Perceived Function) and the second highest conglomerate ranking relationship
(Colour + Intrigue) received results from all interactive product types within a 10%
range of one another (30-40%).
%Occurrences
120
8.7 Summary
This chapter systematically presents the results from the data analysis. The results
show that visceral responses differ from visceral hedonic responses from overall and
for all three interactive products. The strongest occurrence rate for both visceral
responses and visceral hedonic responses is Colour, followed closely by Size and
Shape. The analysis also addresses both research questions by first identifying
attributes evoking visceral hedonic responses in interactive products. These attributes
are: Analogy, Brand, Colour, Gender, Intrigue, Material, Novelty, Perceived
Function, Perceived Usability, Portability, Quality, Shape, Size and Texture.
Secondly, the difference between visceral responses and visceral hedonic responses
to interactive products is demonstrated. The relationships between the attribute
categories are described in order of frequency, with the relationship Perceived
Usability + Perceived Function being the highest. The following chapter (Chapter 9)
interprets these results and their interrelationships and draws conclusions to aid in a
better understanding of visceral hedonic rhetoric applicable to the design of
interactive products.
121
122
123
Chapter 9: Findings and Discussion
In Chapter 8, the results are outlined and categorised into visceral rhetoric and
visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in interactive products. The attribute categories
identified are in themselves significant; however, it is the relationships these
categories share that have demonstrated an additional depth to the findings. The
findings identified in Chapter 8 are now discussed in relation to the theory of visceral
hedonic rhetoric discussed earlier and in relation to relevant literature on product
attributes and perception.
9.1 Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
The overall visceral and visceral hedonic response categories are shown respectively
in Figures 14 and 20, against their frequency occurrence. As can be seen, the
prominent three in both cases are Colour, Size and Shape and the least prominent are
Gender and Texture. These relative ratings are even more pronounced in the visceral
hedonic results than in the purely visceral.
When comparing the results of this study to the literature pertaining to the human
visual perceptual system, a few similarities emerge. Authors in the cognitive science
and neuroscience fields (Ashby and Townsend, 1986; Livingstone and Hubel, 1988;
Biederman, 1987) state that form, colour, texture, motion and depth are the
prominent components of visual perception. However, none of these studies were
conducted on real products; rather, they were conducted using two-dimensional
representations of text, colour blocks and abstract forms. Compared to the recorded
visceral response or the visceral hedonic response result, colour, shape (form) and
size (depth) components of perception do have a high frequency of occurrence rate.
Texture, however, is not nearly as dominant. However, this outcome may be due to
the focus on interactive devices for the study, which do not tend to exhibit much
variation in texture from one device to the next. Also, the procedure maintained
124
throughout this experiment prevented participants from handling or touching the
products. It may be of interest in future research to allow further contact between
consumer and product, thus providing comparative information on more tactile
visceral responses.
Size, Colour and Shape have been described as design variants by Berkowitz (1987)
in that they have the means to create a differentiating advantage over competing
products. This supports their importance and powerful role in consumer attraction as
suggested by the results of this study. Researchers agree that colour has a strong
visual and emotional impact on the viewer (Aslam, 2006; Clarke and Costall, 2007;
D’Andrade and Egan, 1974). This ability to provoke strong emotional impact
supports the result for Colour as presenting the highest rated response. This study
suggests that colour is the most vital visceral hedonic property evident in interactive
products and should be considered in the design process at an early stage to
maximise product impact, and to prevent designers selecting colour as a styling after-
thought.
Within the hedonic coding scheme, different codes emerged: aesthetic, confident,
emotive, interest, slightly positive and strongly positive. These codes and their
definitions and examples can be seen in Table 4. The emotive response code aligns
with Norman’s (2004) example of a visceral response: “I want it”. Interest is
proposed by Desmet (2002) as one of the vital components of emotional processing
and thus forms another hedonic code. Aesthetic responses are discussed by Crilly,
Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) as relating to one particular aspect of cognitive
response: the perception of how pleasing the process of regarding an object is. The
other hedonic codes – Confidence, Slightly Positive and Strongly Positive – arose as
appropriate categories of responses registered during the pilot study.
It was felt unnecessary to quantify the hedonic responses separately from the visceral
responses; however, these results may be further investigated in future work. In this
study, quantification was only registered as hedonic qualifications of visceral
responses due to the generally aligned frequency hierarchies of visceral and visceral
hedonic attribute categories. The very similar hierarchies suggest that the form or
125
manifestation of the visceral attribute is the determinant of the level of hedonic
value, rather than the hedonic attribute itself.
The following sections discuss the visceral hedonic categories in descending
hierarchical order. Full participant responses, further to the excerpts discussed, can
be seen in Appendix E.
9.1.1 Colour
Table 3 describes Colour as being associated with the contrast, perception and
vibrant colouring of the product, as illustrated through their reference as sub- codes
in the table. Participant 4 responded with “the red colour makes it stand out” and
Participant 12 “loved the black and white contrast” (Appendix E). Gorn,
Chattopadhyay, Yi and Dahl (1997) agree that colour is of great importance to design
and feel that colour choice, its hue and saturation levels are imperative to good
design (Bottomley and Doyle, 2006). Participants also responded with their approval
of the colour of the product, without elaboration; for example: “the colour is good”
(Participant 5). Ware (2004) states that there has been more research on the use of
colour in information visualisation than on any other perceptual issue and that colour
affects every aspect of visualisation (Ware, 2004). This could be a part of the
explanation for its dominance in this study’s results. Ware (2004) also states that the
most important fact about colour vision (what we see) is that we have three distinct
colour receptors, called cones, in our retinas that are active at normal light levels.
These three different receptors are sensitive to different frequencies of light: red,
yellow and blue (also known as primary colours) (Ware, 2004).
It is widely accepted that people’s emotions are affected by colour. In particular,
colour is believed to affect the degree of felt arousal (Mikellides, 1990). Increases in
arousal are at first pleasurable and exciting (Gorn, Chattopadhyay, Yi and Dahl,
1997). As colour recorded the highest frequency of occurrence rate in the
experiment, thus concurring with the literature on the topic, this study concludes that
colour is of vital importance for designers to take into consideration early in the
design process.
126
9.1.2 Shape and Size
The terms Form and Depth are used by cognitive and neuron scientists and, in this
study, encapsulate both the shape and the size of a product (Ashby and Townsend,
1986). Size was broken down into “big”, “small” and “perceived weight” (as deduced
from the size of the product). Participants referred to the appeal of slim products with
Participant 1 claiming, “I like slim phones” and Participant 7 saying, “It was nice and
thin”. These observations gave preconceptions of the product being light or heavy.
Shape was divided into responses regarding the proportion of the shape and whether
it was a fluid or geometric form. Participants 12 and 25 referred to the “rounded,
curved edges” of a product as part of the shape they found appealing. Shov Holt and
Shov Holt (2005) agree that hedonic fluidity in forms of interactive products is part
of a new era in modernism and that forms now appear more friendly and inviting in
nature. This curved trend goes by many names: blobbing, blobbism, blurring, blob
morphs, blobjects and blobictecture. Bucquoye and Danne (2007) state that these
rounded forms in design are everywhere and attract much attention far and wide.
Bloch (1995) builds upon this by claiming that product form creates the initial
impression and generates inferences regarding other product attributes in the same
manner as does price (Bloch, 1995).
Forty (1986) writes that product form also helps to develop corporate and brand
identities. Companies such as Braun and Ralph Lauren have distinctive design
philosophies that help develop and reinforce a recognisable corporate character
through product form (Forty, 1986). Norman (2004) confirms that shape and form
are vital in visceral design as it is all about the immediate emotional impact. Bloch
(1995) also claims that product form is important enough to affect the quality of our
lives. The perception and usage of beautifully designed products may provide
sensory pleasure and stimulation (Bloch, 1995). Holland (2010) argues that form has
meaning: it can touch us at such a primal level that our mind is left scrambling to
rationalize our emotional reaction (Holland, 2010). All of these authorities confirm
the importance of form in the design of a product; this justifies the high frequency of
occurrence rates in the results, with shape and size being rated second and third in
the visceral hedonic hierarchy.
127
9.1.3 Intrigue
Intrigue was created by the attention, differences and curiosity participants felt in
response to the product. Responses such as: “Wow, it looks very interesting”
(Participant 1), and “It is very different to what I have seen” (Participant 13) were
common. Babin and Babin (2001) link the notions of hedonic value experienced by
the consumer and intrigue together in the retail experienced environment. However,
their study focuses on the shopping atmosphere such as the store layout, employees,
music, not the product design itself. Foxall (1996) identifies three behavioural
“reinforcements” that shape actual physiology behaviour: hedonic, informational and
aversive. Hedonic reinforcements aimed at an individual’s innate behaviour refer to
the strengthening of consumption behaviour through the generation of feelings and
other sensory stimulation.
Web advertisements incorporating elements of intrigue were branded as “effective”
by some participants in an experiment (Raman and Leckerby, 1998; Dholokia and
Rego, 1998). Research conducted in the area of web advertising by Raman and
Leckerby (1998) found that intrigue played a vital role in the design of the
advertisements because if the consumer finds the digital advertisement to be without
interest, they will immediately terminate the visit to the webpage. Raman and
Leckerby (1998) found that markets on the web are obviously interested in
lengthening consumer visits. Therefore, by adding elements such as animations,
colourful backgrounds and graphics to lure consumers, web designers hope to keep
customers for longer periods. However, Raman and Leckerby’s study suggests that
even though hedonic elements of a website may make it appear more interesting, it is
the utilitarianism of a web advertisement that helps to build longer visits (Raman and
Leckerby, 1998).
Desmet (2003) proposes five categories for the emotional responses that products
may elicit: instrumental, aesthetic, social, surprise and intrigue. He also states that
intrigue emotions such as fascination are elicited by the perception of challenge
combined with promise (Desmet, 2003). Transferring the same designer hopes into
the design of products, in that product designers also want to attract and keep their
consumers interested in their product for longer. It is the high ranking result for
128
intrigue in this study that confirms how important it is to create intrigue in the design
of products.
9.1.4 Material
Material was linked with the finish and the molecular structure of the substance
compound. Participants 8 and 19 stated: “It has a very nice finish” and many
participants liked the shiny surface finish. The assumption of material type used in
the products – such as plastic, metal and aluminium – were seen to produce such a
finish. Many authors (Ashby, Brechet, Cebon and Salvo, 2004; Karana, Hekkert and
Kandachar, 2008; Lennart and Edwards, 2003) agree on the importance of material
selection for product designers to appeal to consumers. However, material types and
their potential to cause emotional attachments to products are still fairly unexplored.
Beaver (2010) does establish the importance of consumers’ concepts of materials in
relation to product design. He also establishes the effect materials have on consumers
by identifying the extent to which materials can prompt emotional judgments and
thereby alter the product user experience (Beaver, 2010).
Ashby, Brechet, Cebon and Salvo (2004) investigate the process of material selection
that designers have to deal with on a day-to-day basis, as there are estimated to be
between 40 000 to 80 000 materials and at least 100 different ways to process them
(Ashby, Brechet, Cebon and Salvo, 2004). Ashby and Johnson (2003) state that there
is personality and character hidden in the material before it has been made into a
recognisable form: an embedded personality; a shy one; not always obvious; easily
concealed or disguised; but one that when appropriately manipulated, imparts its
qualities to the design. Ashby and Johnson (2003) also suggest that materials play an
important role because functionality is dependent on the choice of proper materials
and process to meet the technical requirements of the design (Ashby and Johnson,
2003).
Ljungberg and Edwards (2003) state that aspects of design such as materials
selection and marketing are important factors in the successful development of
products. They address this by developing a comprehensive tool for understanding
129
product development with special respect to material selection (Ljungberg and
Edwards, 2003). This agrees with Karana, Hekkert and Kandachar’s (2008) theory
that designers have started to select or use materials in order to attribute particular
meaning to their products (Karana, Hekkert and Kandachar, 2008). The connection
of product materials and emotional design is a recent idea that has been built upon
Patton’s (1968) research which states that when a designer selects a material, they
must consider fulfilling the three basic requirements: service requirements,
fabrication requirements and economic requirements. According to Patton (1968),
the service requirements rank supreme. The material must stand up to service
demands, which commonly include: dimensional stability, corrosion resistance,
adequate strength, hardness, toughness and heat resistance. The material must also be
capable of shaping and joining to other materials.
9.1.5 Perceived Usability
Perceived usability was related to a sense of confidence in the product and the
ergonomic suggestions as to how the product would be used. Participant 3 stated that
it appeared to “fit in your hands properly” and Participant 10 elaborated that the
product “gives you that feeling of confidence that it will do what it is supposed to”.
These issues are also discussed by Nielsen (1993) and Anderson (1986); however,
their research was conducted in the field of human computer interaction, focusing on
interface design and website usability (Davis, 1989; Flavian, Guinaliu and Gurrea,
2006; Han, Yun, Kwahk and Hong, 2001). Dumas and Redish (1994) state that
usability of a product is one of the most important factors that the user considers in
purchasing a product as well as functionality, price and after sales service quality
(Dumas and Redish, 1994). It is interesting to note that perceived function and
perceived quality were very high in frequency of occurrence rates in the results of
this study, while quality scored relatively low frequencies.
Han, Hwan, Kwahk and Hong (2001) define the usability applicable to the consumer
electronic product as the degree to which the users are satisfied with the product with
respect to both the performance and the image/impression. A consumer’s perceived
usability of a product is believed by many companies to be the key to their success
130
(Han, Hwan, Kwahk and Hong, 2001). Flavian, Guinaliu and Gurrea (2006)
investigated the influence of perceived usability on the user’s loyalty to websites that
they visit. As there was a consistent increase in the degree of website loyalty, the
results confirm that the trust of the user increases when the user considers the system
to be usable. In the same way, greater usability and trust were found to have a
positive influence on user satisfaction (Flavian, Guinaliu and Gurrea, 2006).
9.1.6 Portability
The Portability of the product was represented by the compact design; that is, it was
wearable and convenient. Participant 2 liked the fact that the product “had a clip on
the back so it can hold onto something”, while Participant 11 stated that its “compact
design allowed it to be stored in your pocket easily”. Easy portability allowed the
product to be transported and used in many different contexts. This concurs with
Gemperle, Kasabach, Stivoric, Bauer and Martin’s (1998) view that current trends in
computing tools are consistent with society’s historical need to evolve its tools and
products into more portable, mobile, and (even) wearable forms. Timepieces, radios,
and telephones are common examples of this trend. With advances in technology,
miniaturisation and wireless communication, access to information is no longer
limited to the static environment of the office desktop and personal computer. Well-
designed mobile and wearable products can offer more portable and effective ways
for people to relate to information. However, simply shrinking down computing tools
from the desktop paradigm to a more portable scale only makes them into mini PCs.
It does not take advantage of the opportunities presented by a whole new context of
use and it does not regard the human body as a new context (Gemperle, Kasabach,
Stivoric, Bauer and Martin, 1998).
9.1.7 Perceived Function
Perceived function is connected with the physical and non-physical features of the
product as well as with the appearance of being a multi-functional device.
Participants 5 and 10 commented that they “don’t like slider phones”. Participants
acknowledged that the product looked “functional” (Participant 23) and that it
131
appeared to do what it was meant to. Various physical features of the product such as
the slider on a mobile telephone alluded to the function, while the non-physical
features, such as playing music or speaker systems, were also referred to by
participants. Norman (2004) describes how the visual presentation of products may
assist the consumer in assessing how products should be functionally used. Norman
refers to the three clues in the visible structure of products that can improve the ease
with which they may be understood: affordances, constraints and mappings. Norman
relates each of these terms to the physical function of products. However, they are
also relevant to the perceived use and functionality of products based on visual
inspection (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004).
9.1.8 Novelty
The category of Novelty was associated with modern and futuristic interactive
products. Participants liked the fact that the product appeared new and futuristic.
Participant 4 stated that “I like it because it looks new”, and Participant 7 stated she
liked a product because it appeared “up with technology”. These physical appraisals
differ from Hirschman’s view (1980) that the urge to seeking out novel experiences
and objects comes from within an interactive device, through the consumer’s
experience with the interface and the functioning of a product. Hirschmann’s theory
differs from Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson’s (2008) statement that novelty in
products arouses the consumer’s interest, thus encouraging further interaction.
However, as it is placed fairly low in the frequency of occurrence rates, the study’s
result would suggest that Novelty is one of the less important factors in interactive
product design.
Dinnin (2009) investigates the thrill associated with a brand new possession. He
states that the perception of newness is an important part of the consumption
experience because it creates short-term value. Three factors create the perception of
newness: situational product involvement, a sense that the product is pristine; and,
the physical possession. Value is then derived from the hedonic experience of
ownership and the motivational force of attraction to be the first user of a pristine,
virgin product. The sense of newness fades over time as the product is used and the
132
consumer hedonically adapts to possession (Dennin, 2009). Dinnin (2009) believes
that the value of newness is partially derived from the pleasure associated with
ownership of a new possession. When the consumer senses that a new possession is
truly brand new, there is a distinct level of additional value associated with the
product. The consumer’s sense of newness is generated by his situational
involvement in the product, a sense of the product’s pristine physical qualities, and
possession of the product (Dinnin, 2009).
Flavell (1977) notes that human infants are already engaged in novelty seeking.
When presented with two visual stimuli of equal intensity, one familiar and one
novel, the infant will select the novel stimulus. Thus, novelty seeking would seem to
represent an innate search for information. However, even if novelty seeking is
innate, it is logical to assume that it serves some constructive purpose to the
individual (Flavell, 1977). Cox and Locander (1987) agree with Flavell (1977) in his
view that a novel product will produce a stronger amount of arousal and affective
reaction from a consumer than a familiar one. Coates (2003) suggests that the term
“subjective information” may be regarded as the novelty perceived in the design.
This is largely determined by the extent to which the product deviates from forms
with which the consumer is already familiar. For example, products utilising shapes
and lines that are a radical departure from those normally encountered arouse interest
due to their novelty (Coates, 2003).
The literature agrees with the results of this study to some degree, in that novelty is
not a high scoring frequency of occurrence; however, the literature does suggest that
it is of vital importance to the consumer’s initial impression.
9.1.9 Analogy
Analogy was described as the perception that a product is similar to other products
and organic shaped objects. The comparison to products that participants had already
owned or tried was evident in responses such as: “It reminds me of mobile phone”
(Participant 2). There was also comparison to organic objects such as: “Looks like a
ruby” (Participant 18) and “It looks like a pebble” (Participant 15).
133
Winston (1980) states that much thinking is done by analogy. People face a situation,
then recall a similar situation, match them, and they reason and learn. Analogy-
driven reasoning is described as the memory searching for situations that are likely to
be similar to a new, given situation. The search assumes that the useful, remembered
situations will involve the same sorts of things as the new one at some level of
classification (Winston, 1980). Analogical reasoning operates by comparing cases. In
most case-based reasoning systems, cases are stored as named collections of facts in
memory (Mostek, Forbus and Meverden, 2000). Analogy was referred to by Crilly,
Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) as “metaphor” within the visual references sphere of a
consumer response.
Analogy can be of great consequence to the designer if the design itself resembles
something existing or previously existing. This puts pressure upon the designer to not
only come up with new ideas in response to their designs, but to stimulate positive
analogies in the consumer’s mind.
9.1.10 Brand
Responses to Brand were responsible for inciting confidence in the product.
Participants relating a product to a reputable brand felt confident that the product
would not let them down. Examples of this are: “I trust Nokias” (Participant 1) and
“it is a good brand so I would buy it” (Participant 8). Thomson, MacInnis and Park
(2005) demonstrate a strong emotional bond between consumer and brand. Cox and
Locander (1987) explore the relationship between brand attitudes and product
novelty, findings that the formation of brand attitudes for a novel product may
depend more heavily on consumers’ affective reaction to the advertisement than on
their brand-related beliefs.
Roberts (2004) states that the term “brand” is coming to an end and it is time to find
a new concept with greater emotional potency. It is time for brands to evolve into
lovemarks: the next evolution in branding. Lovemarks are about building and
strengthening emotional bonds between brands and consumers. Pawle and Cooper
(2006) provide strong evidence that the relationships that consumers have with
134
brands are much more heavily influenced by emotional factors (Pawle and Cooper,
2006). Brands are coded in memory on a cognitive and emotional basis (Gordon,
2006). Thomson, MacInnis and Park (2005) suggest that consumers can become
emotionally attached to consumption objects, including brands (Thomson, MacInnis
and Park, 2005). Norman (2004) states that package designers and brand managers
are looking beyond graphic elements, or even the design as a whole, to forge an
emotional bond between consumers and brands. While branding is an entirely
separate field studied by marketers and corporate identity designers, product
designers should still be aware of its influence upon the consumer response.
9.1.11 Quality
Quality is coupled with being reliable and durable. This is shown through
participants’ responses: “It looks heavy duty” (Participant 18) and “It doesn’t look
like it will break when you drop it” (Participant 13). This is reinforced by the
literature which links the quality of products to being durable and longlasting
(Garvin, 1986). Zeithaml (1988) investigates consumer perceptions of price, quality
and value that were considered pivotal determinants of shopping behaviour and
product choice. Zeithaml (1988) defines quality as superiority or excellence and by
extension, perceived quality can be defined as the consumer’s judgement about a
product’s overall excellence or superiority (Zeithaml, 1988). As Crilly, Moultrie and
Clarkson (2004) detail in the design dialogue, production quality of a product may
influence the consumer response. The influence of production quality and
perceptions of quality, superiority or excellence (and consequent consumer response)
are supported by the results of this study.
9.1.12 Texture
Texture is related to being decorative as well as to the utility of the surface, such as a
grip. The decorative texture is associated with the “lines on it” and “the detail on the
sides” (Participant 12) giving the product a decorative appeal. Participant 3 referred
to the utility of the texture of the grip: “You can put it on a table and it won’t slide
off”. Previously the term “decoration” was used, but a new terminology, “bling
135
bling”, has begun to emerge internationally, migrating from the hip hop scene. This
reinforces claims made by participants that “It’s very bling” (Participant 5). The term
refers to wearing excessive jewellery, as favoured by rappers. At first it referred to
jewellery only, but has now become a general indicator of decoration (Bucquoye and
Danne, 2007). Details and decoration of a product were outlined by Crilly, Moultrie
and Clarkson (2004) as product attributes considered by designers. Results of this
study confirm that consumers, like designers, notice and consider the texture of
products in an immediate appraisal.
9.1.13 Gender
Gender is divided into unisex, masculine and feminine associations to products.
Participants associated various products which stereotypically-assigned gender roles
such as: “It looks cute and girly” (Participant 12) and “nice and masculine”
(Participant 15). Slyke, Comunale and Belanger (2002) believe that gender is a
predicator of an individual’s intent to purchase products. Research has been
conducted on isolating and separating female and male responses to various product
rhetoric, such as product shape (de Medeiros and Ashton, 2006). As there were an
uneven number of male and female participants, this study did not consider the male
and female responses gathered to provide a sufficient sample for analysis.
Meyers-Levy and Sternthal (1991) conducted two experiments, data from which
suggests that the genders differ in their process of forming judgements. In
comparison with men, women appear to have a lower threshold for elaborating on
message cues and, thus, make greater use of such cues in judging products (Meyers-
Levy and Sternthal, 1991). It has also been proven that genders differ in their
environment of which product attributes they consider to be more important
(Holbrook, 1986) and that both genders are more easily persuaded when message
content is relevant to the opposite gender’s social role rather than to their own gender
role (Sistrunk and McDavid, 1971). This concurs with the results of this study which
show that gender can indeed affect hedonic response to a product and could even
preclude further interaction.
136
9.1.14 Variants in Visceral Hedonic Responses between Products
Colour in mobile telephones (22.5%) remains stronger in occurrence rate than MP3
players (15.6%) and USB memory flash drives (11.6%). Possible explanations for
this could be the strong personal connection consumers have with their mobile
phones as opposed to the other two types of interactive products. The literature
suggests (D’Andrade and Egan, 1974; Gorn, Chattopadhyay, Yi and Dahl, 1997) that
colour provides a strong emotional bond that transcends other physical attributes.
The experimental results from this study support this assertion, showing that a strong
positive association exists between visceral hedonic responses and the Colour of
mobile telephones, more so than with the other interactive products.
Intrigue provides slightly higher occurrence rates in USB memory flash drives
(15.2%) than in the other two products: mobile telephones (7.7%) and MP3 players
(7.4%). Products such as USB memory flash drives present considerably more
positive Intrigue responses than any other interactive device. This may be due to the
nature of the product, as the USB flash memory drive is used more seldom than the
other two products and may, therefore, be more able to tolerate more novel forms
than a product that travels constantly with the user. The frequency of use of the USB
was discovered through the screening questionnaire results (Appendix D).
Shape is a more important attribute in MP3 players (15.6%) than it is in the other two
products: mobile telephones (9.3%) and USB memory flash drives (9.6%). This may
be because MP3 players need to be carried or transported while engaging in various
other activities. The high frequency of occurrence rate in Shape is reinforced by
Bloch’s (1995) theory of the ideal form and the vital role the shape of a product
plays. Figure 20 illustrates the specific product properties that cause visceral hedonic
responses to the design of interactive products, thus addressing the first research
question posed at the beginning of the project: What are the specific product
properties that cause visceral hedonic responses in designed interactive products?
137
9.1.15 Variants between Visceral Responses and Visceral Hedonic Responses
Comparing the conglomerate visceral responses and the visceral hedonic responses
(Figure 24), the more distinct differences are that Intrigue and Colour, and to a lesser
degree Material, have a higher occurrence rate hedonically than Perceived usability
and Analogy. Figure 24 suggests that Analogy and Perceived usability have a
stronger negative association in interactive products. Bar (2007) investigates how
analogy associations generate predictive behaviour in the cognitive science field.
Intrigue is positively received by participants of all interactive products. Figure 24
highlights which aspects of visceral rhetoric create the most hedonic responses, as
posed in the second research question: How does different visceral rhetoric in
products affect hedonic responses? Figure 24 also reveals and supports the
theoretical proposals that visceral and hedonic properties are closely aligned.
9.2 Visceral Hedonic Response Relationships
Ashby and Townsend (1986) attest that determination of the combined perception of
visual stimuli (e.g. colour, texture and form) is a fundamentally important issue. The
interaction of perceived stimuli is explored through the relationships seen in the
visceral hedonic rhetoric results. Relationships emerge from the codes and
combination of responses. Seven relationships are identified and can be seen in Table
9. These relationships are shown in Figure 27 and are discussed later in more depth.
138
Figure 27: Generic Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Relationships
Figure 27 illustrates the seven relationships placed on the target according to their
visceral hedonic rhetoric frequency of occurrence percentage (Figure 20). Black
arrows illustrate the relationships between the categories. For example, the
relationship between Colour and Intrigue shows that Colour has a much higher
frequency of occurrence rate than Intrigue as shown by their relative positions from
the target centre, while the black arrow represents the relationship joining the two
categories. The asterisks (*) demonstrate the ranking of the relationship (Table 9),
and the percentages positioned next to the relationship ranking detail the frequency
of occurrence rate of the relationship.
visceral
hedonic
rhetoric
Material
Size
Texture
Portability
6%
4%
2%
12%
10%
8%
14%
20%
18%
16%
0%
= Relationship = Frequency occurrence = Relationship ranking = Relationship frequency occurrence
%*%
1*
2*
3*
4*
5*
6*
7*9.57%
27.65%
17.02%
15.95%
14.89%
12.76%
2.12%
Novelty
Perceived Usability
Perceived Function
Shape
Quality
Colour
Analogy
Brand
Gender
intrigue
2.13%
14.4%4.76%
2.3%
7.56%
8.55%
16.44%
0.82%
9.86%
6.9%
7.73%
11.84%
4.27%
2.63%
139
9.2.1 Colour - Gender Stereotypes
Figures 29 and 30 show that Intrigue and Gender connect to Colour and create two
separate relationships. The first is the stereotypical assumption that certain colours
pertain to certain genders, as in: “It looks like a pink girl’s phone”. The stereotype of
pink relating to the female gender and blue being a predominately male colour is
evident in these findings; yet, the immediate visceral hedonic rhetoric responses did
regularly link these two categories. As previously discussed in the Gender attribute
discussion, the study did not deliberate on the male and female responses as there
was insufficient evidence for comparison. However, with this Colour + Gender
relationship it was interesting to note that the majority of the responses for this
relationship came from male participants.
Figure 28: Colour and Gender Relationship
Authorities agree that product judgments are strongly influenced by gender
(Holbrook and Schindler, 1994; Meyers and Sternthal, 1991). This implies that
designers need to be more aware of the connotations consumers draw from the colour
selection of products and their attitudes when doing so. This gender preference may
be due to the fact that at birth, pink and blue are stereotypically associated with the
two genders and are referenced accordingly in children’s clothing, toys and
accessories (Pomerleau, Boldue, Malcuit and Cossette, 1990). Gender stereotypes
can exclude and alienate certain consumers, as the results and literature have shown.
colour gender
gender bias of stereotypical colour associations = Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
VHR (16.44%)VR (13.21%)
5*(12.76%)
VHR (0.82%)VR (1.84%)
140
With this in mind, a designer should be conscious of Colour + Gender relationships
when selecting the hue of the product.
9.2.2 Vibrant Intrigue
The second relationship attached to colour is that created through the attention and
intrigue caused by a vibrant colour. The vibrancy of the colour of an interactive
product creates a positive interest, encouraging a consumer to further investigate a
product. Responses such as “Wow I like the colour it is very bright, it looks
interesting” support this relationship and provide new insight to designers on how to
create attention-grabbing products by maximising the use of their colour selection.
Figure 29: Colour and Intrigue Relationship
D’Andrade and Egan (1974) discovered that the emotional associations usually
found with colour were not due primarily to the actual hue, light or wavelength
involved, but to the degree of saturation and vibrancy. Thus, if a yellow object
seemed cheerful, it was not because of the yellow hue of the object but because the
colour of the object was vibrantly saturated (D’Andrade and Egan, 1974). Participant
responses in this study confirm the theoretical relationship between colour and
intrigue and confirm how important vibrancy is.
= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
colour intrigue
the vibrancy of the colour caused attention and intrigue
2*(17.02%)
VHR (9.86%)VR (6.09%)
VHR (16.44%)VR (13.21%)
141
Colour is also said by Aslam (2006) to be useful in creating a different value from
similar products from competing manufactures. Marketers may launch a product
colour that is typical of the product category, differentiate it from the product
category by using additional colour cues, or delinking the relationship between
colour and the product’s perceived quality (Aslam, 2006). This has been done
successfully by companies such as Apple, and products such as Gaterade and M&Ms
which have each launched novel coloured product lines (Parmar, 2004).
Ratneshwar, Shocker and Stewart (1987) claim that the “attraction effect” refers to
an inferior product’s ability to increase the attractiveness of its alternative by being
added to a choice set. The results of their investigation found that the attraction effect
may be substantially diminished, though not eliminated, when meaningfulness and
familiarity are controlled (Ratneshwar, Shocker and Stewart, 1987). This relationship
has many connotations for the designer, as they must select a colouring for their
products suited to entice but not exclude consumers from the target market.
9.2.3 Product Confidence
The interrelations between five categories produced four relationships between them,
as can be seen in Figures 30, 32, 33 and 34. The first is the relationship between
Perceived function and Perceived usability which creates a perception of ease of use
and function in the product. The second is the relationship between Perceived
usability and Brand, producing an aura of confidence in the product. The third,
Brand and Analogy, forges a familiarity to branding of interactive devices. The last
relationship brings together Analogy and Shape, producing the association of organic
shaped objects. These are all described in more detail in Table 9.
142
Figure 30: Brand and Perceived Usability Relationship
Figure 30 represents the relationship of Brand and Perceived usability. This
relationship is derived from constant referrals to a product brand and how easy it is to
use. An example of this is: ‘I love Nokia’s; they work for me’. Confidence in the
product’s ability to do the required task is elicited through other categories such as
Perceived function, Shape and Portability, but none as closely as Brand. This
concurs with literature in the marketing field, specifically Rao, Qu and Ruukert
(1999), regarding perceived quality through brand positioning and loyalty. From this
relationship, it can be seen that good brand reputation and the campaign surrounding
it are imperative functions of the marketing and advertising disciplines.
Park, Milberg and Lawson (1991) examine two factors that differentiate between
successful and unsuccessful brand associations: product feature similarity and brand
concept consistency. For both function-orientated and prestige orientated brand
names, most favourable reactions occur when brand associations are made using a
high level of brand concept consistency and high product feature similarity. The
relative impact of these two factors differs to some extent, depending on the nature of
the brand name concept (Park, Milberg and Lawson, 1991). A function-orientated
brand concept is understood primarily in terms of unique brand aspects that are
related to product performance, while a prestige-orientated brand concept is
understood primarily in terms of the consumer’s expression of self-concept or images
= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
brand perceived usability
product con!dence
6*(9.57%)
VHR (2.63%)VR (2.66%)
VHR (7.73%)VR (12.32%)
143
of self (Park, Milberg and Lawson, 1991). The results of this study support the
Product-Confidence relationship and confirm the theories presented in existing
literature concerning the power of brand reputation, as previously discussed (9.1.10
Brand).
9.2.4 Perceived Ease of Use
Figure 31 represents the relationship between Perceived function and Perceived
usability as being the perception of ease of use and function of the product.
Responses such as “looks very functional and easy to use” (Participant 18) reinforce
this relationship. How well and easy a product functions can be a difficult message to
convey through visceral hedonic rhetoric, as many such judgments are formed after a
consumer has picked up the product and tried to use it. Judgments that are made so
instantaneously rely on convincing the consumer that the product will fulfil its
functional promise and function with ease.
Figure 31: Perceived Function and Perceived Usability Relationship
Fukuda (2009) conducted two experiments that compared user perception between,
before and after using products, focusing on perception of use and function. User
perception of products should be investigated in several phases of using a product in
order to clarify the influence of user experience on effectiveness. It was found that
= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
perceived function
perceived usability
ease of use
1*(27.65%)
VHR (7.73%)VR (12.32%)
VHR (6.9%)VR (7.39%)
144
the criteria such as reliability, trust, satisfaction and willingness to use were
evaluated not on the basis of one characteristic of the product alone, but with respect
to several characteristics of the product and the user’s own feeling (Fukuda, 2009).
People tend to use or not use an application to the extent they believe it will help
them perform their job better. This is referred to as “perceived usefulness”. If
potential users believe that a given application is useful, they may, at the same time,
believe that the system is too hard to use and that the performance benefits of usage
are outweighed by the effort required. That is, in addition to usefulness, usage is
theorised to be influenced by perceived ease of use (Davis, 1989). “Perceived ease of
use” in contrast, then, refers to the degree to which a person believes that using a
particular system will be free of effort. All else being equal, we claim that an
application perceived to be easier to use than another, is more likely to be accepted
by users (Davis, 1989). This relates closely to the previous relationship of Brand and
Perceived usability (as seen in Figure 30) where the consumer feels confidence in the
product. This has many implications for the designer and the functionality of the
product. Not only does the product have to actually function well, but also more
importantly, it has it appear to function well.
9.2.5 Familiarity with Brands
Figure 32 depicts the relationship found between Brand and Analogy. An association
to familiar products referred to by brand names is observed in the participant
responses. Responses such as “It’s just like the iPod” (Participant 12) were reported.
Designers must be aware that certain products remind consumers of other familiar
products already on the market. This can be advantageous or disadvantageous
depending on the situation. Designers trying to associate their product with an
existing successful product, such as an iPod, purposely make use of similarities.
Conversely, associations with some products can prompt the consumer’s negative
connotation which is immediately attached to the new product.
145
Figure 32: Brand and Analogy Relationship
Park, Milberg and Lawson (1991) state that consumers’ reactions to brand
associations appear to involve a categorisation process in which the new product is
judged according to the suitability of its membership in a category (perceived fit) that
already contains a product or set of products and that has a brand name as its
identifying label (Park, Milberg and Lawson, 1991). As discussed, references may
also be made by consumers to similar products within the product category. Products
may be explicitly compared to competing products. These comparisons inform
purchase decisions because product form is often used to differentiate products
within the marketplace (Underhill, 2000; Bloch, 1995; O’Shaughnessy, 1992). The
perceived similarity between a particular product and previous generations of
products may also moderate a response. In particular, when consumers seek to
replace existing purchases, prior knowledge may be used to make judgements on
attractiveness (Baxter, 1995).
Beyond reference to recent designs, products may evoke recollections of historic or
iconic designs. For example, within the automobile industry, new products frequently
utilise nostalgic design cues that remind drivers fondly of revered cars of the past
(Coates, 2003). Participants of this study often referred to brands of products purely
from their styling attributes. When a consumer can tell the product is made by a
company without their branding name being etched anywhere on the product, it is
brand analogy
familiar to product brands= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
4*(14.89%)
VHR (4.27%)VR (7.73%)
VHR (2.63%)VR (2.66%)
146
evident that product styling should be carefully considered during product
development. Branding influences the designer’s decisions and impacts greatly upon
the consumers’ judgments, as the study and literature both confirm.
9.2.6 Familiarity with Form
Figure 33 illustrates the relationship between Analogy and Shape. Responses in this
relationship category are created by familiar recollection of objects that have similar
forms. Responses such as “looks like a pebble” (Participant 15) are a typical
response. Organic form analogies are more prevalent than geometric form
comparisons. The popularity of organic form in the results concurs with the Skov
Holt and Skov Holt (2005) claim that fluid forms are becoming extremely more
popular in today’s desired products (Skov Holt and Skov Holt, 2005). Thus,
designers must be aware that their product, and other similarly shaped objects
(whether natural or manufactured), will be linked in the consumer’s mind.
According to Murphy and Medin (1985), other than object-to-object similarity
relationships, people may have their own theories about why entities of entirely
different classes (e.g. natural organic objects and man-made interactive devices)
belong in the same category. To understand category coherence and categorisation
phenomena, Murphy and Medin suggest that conceptual relationships such as form
need to be considered along with object familiarity (Murphy and Medin, 1985).
147
Figure 33: Analogy and Shape Relationship
Park, Milberg and Lawson (1991) state that product feature similarity perceptions
depend on identifying the relationships between product associations and existing
branded products, whether concrete (e.g. feature correlations, attribute matching) or
abstract (e.g. shared usage situations). When interpreting a product’s visual
appearance, consumers draw upon sources external to the perceived object as points
of reference. These visual references help the consumer to understand the product by
reflecting generic designs, alluding to other concepts, or evoking comparison with
living things (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004). For example, recognising
allusions to the product types or living things may result in the perception of
unexpected humour and the formation of emotional attachments (Baxter, 1995). The
participants’ frequent references to Shape justify the relevance and importance of
form analogy, and illustrates how diligent designers must be in deciding on their
product forms.
9.2.7 Longevity
The relationship between Novelty or its sub-codes – Modern Technology and
Futuristic – and Quality emerged, despite the fact that these were often low
frequency occurrence rate responses (Figure 34). The relationship is strongly
associated with longevity and appears in reference to how new a product looks and
how recent the technology appears to be. An association is then made on the quality
= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
2.3% 4.76%analogy shape
familiar to product form
3*(15.95%)
VHR (11.84%)VR (12.18%)
VHR (4.27%)VR (7.73%)
148
of the product and the longevity or duration of its usefulness. Recently released
products appeal to the immediate consumer decision, of something being newly
created and purchased. However, there is literature that explores what happens when
the novelty wears off in product lines and the consumer satisfaction levels fall
(Richins and Bloch, 1986; Tidd and Bodley, 2002). Material and quality are often
associated with the physical longevity of an object (Beaver, 2010); however, the
close link between quality and recent technology operates on a much shorter timeline
as consumers are more concerned with “newness” than durability. Responses such as
“looks new and futuristic” (Participant 27) were given to express that they liked the
product; if it was considered outdated or designed with old technology, the product
was disliked.
Figure 34: Quality and Novelty Relationship
Even though these two categories are very low in frequency occurrence rate, the
relationship binding them remains underpinned by the association of time. Prelec and
Lowenstein (1997) state that time plays a role in all of our decisions and impacts on
the consumer’s evaluation of a product’s physical appearance, as this is the first form
of connection the user has with the product (Bloch, Brunel and Arnold, 2003).
All consumers wish to purchase products that are physically as perfect as possible.
Blemishes, dirt, and physical damage deter us. We are likely to infer that quality and
quality novelty
longevity= Relationship ranking= Visceral rhetoric= Visceral hedonic rhetoric
*VR
VHR
7*(2.12%)
VHR (2.3%)VR (3.35%)
VHR (4.76%)VR (4.51%)
149
product performance will be compromised when we perceive the product as
physically imperfect (Kotler and Mantrala, 1985). However, we are also deterred by
imperfections that do not explicitly indicate damage to the product or inferior quality.
Although consumers differ in their individual level of focus on product appearance
(Bloch, Brunel and Arnold, 2003), product appearance is considered a universal
signal of product quality (Dawar and Parker, 1994).
As the consumer becomes familiar with the new possession, they become
psychologically accustomed to the level of stimulation it provides (Strahilevitz and
Lowenstein, 1998). As time passes, the intensity of this affect decreases; this process
is known as “hedonic adaptation” (Frederrick and Lowenstein, 1999). While the
frequency of occurrence rate of both these categories and the Novelty (“newness”) –
Quality relationship is relatively low, these issues are still important for the designer
to consider.
9.3 Visceral Hedonic Response Relationship Clusters
All visceral hedonic response categories involved within the seven separate
relationships and how these relationships cluster together are depicted in Figure 35.
Categories not associated with a relationship are not shown in this figure. However,
they may rank highly in the hierarchy; for example the second highest category Size
(14.4%) does not appear in a relationship. This means that the response to Size is not
mentioned concurrently with another category; however, it is still a prominent result
in the hierarchy of visceral hedonic rhetoric. The relationship cluster summary is
only concerned with how the relationships assemble (Figure 35), not with what the
hierarchy of visceral and visceral hedonic response is (Figures 14 and 20).
150
Figure 35: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Relationship Summary
The relationships shown in a conglomerate (Figure 35) vary in result dominance in
the three different interactive product types used in this study. This can be seen in
more detail in Figure 26. The results (Figure 26) suggest that each of these three
different interactive products (mobile telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory
flash drives) have different visceral hedonic response occurrences that need to be
addressed by designers accordingly. For example, the difference in Mp3 player
relationships to the other two product types suggests that the needs and wants of the
consumer are different for each product. More emphasis should be placed on the
relationships between Shape + Analogy, Analogy + Brand and Brand + Perceived
Usability when designing an MP3 player. However, Colour + Gender is the dominant
relationship to be considered in mobile telephone design.
product con!dence
perceived usability
perceived function
perceived usability
ease of use
brand shape
familiar to product formanalogyfamiliar to product brands
perceived usability
colour intrigue
the vibrancy of the colour caused attention and intrigue
gender bias of stereotypical colour associations gender
colour intrigue
Qu
quality novelty
longevity
151
9.4 The Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Dialogue
The design dialogue, as first presented by Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson (2004) in
Chapter 2 and modified for the areas of this study in Chapter 6, has been redeveloped
with the findings from this study (Figure 36). By introducing these new components
to the framework, it has developed into the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue,
thus producing one of this study’s original contributions to new knowledge. The new
components of the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue are embedded
throughout. The visceral hedonic rhetoric design theory developed from the findings
of this study and the visceral hedonic rhetoric design tool (Chapter 10) provide cues
to assist designers in the design process.
The branding stipulations influencing the product are also a finding of this study and,
as such, are presented as an external influence (on the design team) at the beginning
of the design dialogue. Another external influence on the product is the production
quality and available technology shown through the findings involving quality,
novelty and the relationship longevity. The environmental distractions have been
included to encompass the neutral viewing environment and a two second viewing
time, as specified by the methodology. The visual reference criteria are modified to
draw on the relationship findings such as ease of use, confidence, stereotypes and
familiarity, as well as on the visceral hedonic responses such as intrigue and analogy.
Product attributes have been regenerated from the visceral hedonic responses and are
colour, size, shape, material and texture.
Within the emotional cognition levels, the visceral level is the focus of this study;
thus, the reflective and behavioural levels have been removed from the diagram. The
personal characteristics such as gender, age and experience of the consumer also
have an influence over their visceral hedonic response with those characteristics
relevant to this study now listed on the diagram. The active response of the consumer
to visceral hedonic rhetoric attributes has been established through the literature as
potentially including the purchase, increased use and the prolonged life of the
product.
152
Figure 36: The Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Dialogue
9.5 Summary
This chapter discusses the results of this study by comparing them with the relevant
literature on product attributes and the theory of visceral hedonic rhetoric. The
chapter also outlines in more detail the seven different relationships between the
visceral hedonic response categories. These relationships are: attention through
colour and intrigue, colour and gender association, analogy to shaped objects,
familiarity with brands, perceived longevity, confidence in the product, ease of use
and function. These relationships are then discussed in respect to the three different
interactive products (mobile telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory flash drives)
employed in this study. An original contribution of this study is described and
illustrated in the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue, where the findings of the
study are put into context, building on earlier discussed literature. These
contributions are detailed in the following conclusion chapter.
CONTEXT OF CONSUMPTION
PRODUCER CONSUMER
RESPONSE
VISUAL REFERENCES
DESIGN TEAM
PRODUCT SENSES
ENVIRONMENTAL DISTRACTIONSNeutral Background
2 second viewing time
Consumer-Product Interaction
ColourSize
ShapeMaterialTexture
Vision[Touch][Taste][Smell]
[Hearing]
Stereotypes Product Con!dence Analogy Ease of Use Familiarity Intrigue
BRANDINGSTIPULATIONS
PRODUCTION QUALITYAVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
VISION QUALITY[SENSORY CONDITION]
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICSAge, GenderExperience
RHETORICProduct RhetoricDesign Language
DESIGN THEORY
Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
Design Principles
A!ect
Detachment
Attachment
Emotional Cognition
VisceralPhysicality
HedonicPleasurableEnjoyment
INCREASED USEPROLONGED LIFE
ActionApproach
Avoid
153
154
155
Chapter 10: Conclusion
Within the design and emotion research field, this study has explored visceral
hedonic rhetoric in regards to the design of interactive products. Visceral design,
consumer hedonics and product rhetoric have been previously studied individually,
but never as a conglomerate. The literature review found that much of the research
reviewed was conducted from business, marketing, psychology, medical,
neuroscience and theoretical perspectives. A lack of knowledge regarding visceral
hedonic rhetoric in the design of products was identified, and the need for
information or tools describing how designers could provoke such a response to their
designs was revealed. This provided the research focus of exploring consumers’
hedonic responses to visceral rhetoric in interactive products. The term “visceral
hedonic rhetoric” is defined as properties of a product that persuasively elicit the
pursuit of pleasure through an instinctual level of cognition; this definition places the
study in a novel position.
The purpose of this research was to increase awareness and understanding of the
elicitation of instantaneous emotional product responses. This was achieved through
the identification and exploration of visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in interactive
products. A deeper understanding of this issue will promote the attachment response
of consumer-product relationships. As seen in Figure 37, a visceral hedonic rhetoric
grey hexagon has been added to the original problem description outlined in Chapter
1 (Figure 2). Figure 37 illustrates a conclusion of this study: that incorporation of
visceral hedonic rhetoric into the emotional design of a product will help strengthen
the product attachment formed by a consumer and lead to the prolonged lifespan of
an otherwise disposable product.
156
Figure 37: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Product Lifecycle
Figure 38 illustrates the position of the research at the junction of the consumer and
product domains, and situates it within the larger research field of design and
emotion. It depicts the contribution to new knowledge in regards to the hierarchy and
relationships discovered in the area of visceral hedonic rhetoric. Within this
theoretical model, the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue (Figure 36) positions
itself as the detailed output, constituting both hierarchy and relationship findings, of
this research. The theoretical model (Figure 38) depicts the context within which the
visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue (Figure 36) resides. Additionally, it
displays the consumer-product attachment that is formed as a result of implementing
the new knowledge area of visceral hedonic rhetoric.
Future consumer products that employ visceral hedonic rhetoric will have a greater
ability to attract and sustain a prolonged product life due to the consequent increased
likelihood of consumer emotional attachment. In time, it is hoped to reduce the mass
amount of consumer products prematurely discarded every year.
Design Conception Manufacture Point Of Sale Product
ConsumptionProduct Disposal
Emotional Design
Product Attachment
ProlongedLife
Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric
157
Figure 38: Theoretical Model
This understanding of visceral hedonic rhetoric significantly contributes not only to
design considerations of the future, but also provides new knowledge and insights
into consumer-product attachment towards prolonged product life.
10.1 Design Recommendations
Emotional design as it stands today is not well understood by designers, and they
have not yet agreed on a uniting theory to successfully aid in design for emotion.
Thus, the design of products is often determined by a designer’s intuitive judgements
Design and Emotion
Product Attraction
and Attachment
ProductDomain
Consumer Domain
Visceral HedonicRhetoric
relationship
hierarchy
158
and educated guesses (Liu, 2003). Although the importance of design skill, training
and experience in emotional design is beginning to be acknowledged in industry,
there are dangers inherent in relying solely on intuition and anecdotal evidence to
justify a product’s appearance. Basing design decisions on the invocation of personal
experience, risks drawing on highly subjective and unrepresentative information.
Furthermore, designers are often not representative of the consumers of the products
that they create (Norman, 2002; Cooper, 2001). It is also claimed that designers
frequently consider their judgement to be independent of consumer tastes (Margolin,
1997), and there is little communication between designers and consumers on this
subject to determine if a designer’s taste will be commercially accepted by the
consumer market.
Product appearance and consumer response are key components in defining
consumer-product relationships which, in turn, significantly affect a product’s
likelihood of commercial success (Bloch, 1995). The potential for visceral hedonic
rhetoric to satisfy many of the unarticulated requirements of consumers makes this
research a critical contribution in determining consumer attachment and perceived
product value (Cooper, 2001; Goldenberg and Mazursky, 2002). Designing products
to appear of greater value may also provide the opportunity to command a higher
product price and enjoy increased unit sales (Cagan and Vogel, 2002). In mature
markets, where the functionality and performance of products are often taken for
granted, attention is increasingly focused on the visual characteristics of products. In
such markets, attention to a product’s appearance promises the manufacturer one of
the highest returns on investment (Lewalski, 1988). Furthermore, the consideration
of emotional design and product appearance should be integral to the product
concept. It is vital that right from the moment the product brief is being discussed
with the client, the designers get a clear answer to the question: ‘What should the
product express to the consumer’ (Monö, 1997). This objective for the product’s
appearance should then be considered throughout the design process (Baxter, 1995;
Dieter, 1991).
Awareness of visceral rhetoric in products and the hedonic aspects of consumer
response provide a basis upon which the subject of emotional product designs might
159
be better understood and communicated. Thus, the visceral hedonic rhetoric design
principles are presented (Figure 39) to foster potential for future better-designed
products for consumers. This is because these visceral hedonic rhetoric principles
clarify expected responses to product attributes. No design will be successful unless
it embodies ideas that are held in common with the people for whom the product in
intended (Forty, 1986).
The two sub-questions developed to break down the main research aim and provide
better focus and direction to the study are:
• What are the specific product properties that cause visceral hedonic
responses to designed interactive products?
• How does different visceral rhetoric in products affect hedonic responses?
The research results indicate that there is a hierarchy of visceral hedonic attributes
evident in the recorded responses to interactive products. This hierarchy was
constructed by combining the data from all three interactive product types, mobile
telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory flash drives, in order to make conclusions
in relation to interactive products. These need to be taken into account when
designing in the future. Visceral hedonic attributes in hierarchical order include:
Colour, Size, Shape, Intrigue, Material, Perceived Usability, Portability, Perceived
Function, Novelty, Analogy, Brand, Quality, Texture and Gender. However, the
results also uncover seven relationships between these attribute categories. These
relationships consist of: Colour + Intrigue (where the vibrant colour caught
participant attention causing intrigue in the product); Colour + Gender
(demonstrating a strong association with a high occurrence of concurrent references);
and, Perceived usability + Brand (both appearing to promote greater confidence in
the product). Analogy + Shape are associated with various shaped products; Novelty
+ Quality exhibit a strong association with historical exposure or experience, while
Brand + Analogy expose the participant’s familiarity with other products and is
highly influenced by the association of the brand. Perceived usability + Perceived
Function cause the participant perception of ease of use and function.
160
The second sub-question was answered in Chapter 8, as depicted in Figure 24’s
comparison of visceral rhetoric and visceral hedonic rhetoric. This comparison shows
that Intrigue has a higher frequency of occurrence rate hedonically and is perceived
as a positive response by consumers. This contrasts with Perceived Usability and
Analogy, which have a weaker frequency rate hedonically, suggesting consumers
associate both categories with more negative immediate responses. Besides these
conclusions, the hierarchies of visceral and visceral hedonic attribute categories are
fairly similar, suggesting that it is the interpretation of visceral attributes that
determines hedonism, rather than a separate set of hedonic attributes. This
emphasises the importance of the visceral attribute codes and the way they are
applied in the design of the product. Further studies should explore the visceral
attribute codes identified, and how their sub-codes are heightened or qualified by
hedonic interpretation.
As previously discussed in Chapter 9, the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue
(Figure 36) illustrates the design team making use of the visceral hedonic rhetoric
design theory, in order to better design future products. One possible way of being
able to equip designers to address the issue of visceral hedonic rhetoric is through the
use of the visceral hedonic rhetoric design tool (Figure 39).
161
Figure 39: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Tool
Designers should consider these design principles or visceral hedonic attribute
correlations during the design process. The grey outer parts of the wheel represent
the relationships that bind some of these visceral hedonic rhetoric categories. The
inner coloured parts of the wheel represent the individual visceral hedonic attribute
categories and include both a note of the hierarchical strength of attributes (strength
of the black bars), and a more detailed description of the attribute qualities for
designers to consider when conceiving their product design. This tool may allow
162
designers to systematically work their way through the wheel and address each
attribute appropriately. A hypothetical scenario of how the visceral hedonic rhetoric
design tool concept might be utilised by a designer is described in Figure 40.
Designer X has been given a brief to design a mobile telephone for the target market of 18-24 years olds. Designer X proceeds with their individual approach to the design process accordingly. In this case, designer X has conducted the necessary background research and produced some rough conceptual sketches to map out their ideas.
From all of the rough ideas generated an initial design concept has been created. Notations have been made on the initial concept referring to the usage, functionality and features of the mobile telephone. As well as possible materials the shell of the phone could be made from.
The designer then refers to the visceral hedonic rhetoric design tool (Figure 39). Designer X turns the wheel of the tool systematically, while making further design decisions in regards to their conceptual mobile telephone design.
Figure 40: Hypothetical Scenario of the Tool Application
1 Design Brief
2 Initial Concept
3 Consult Wheel
163
The designer investigates the visceral hedonic attributes located in the coloured parts of the wheel (for example, Colour, by taking the consumers’ perception, the vibrancy and the contrast of the colour into consideration). Then, they follow the arrows to the possible impacting relationships located on the grey outer circle (for example, the impact that Colour will have upon Gender associations and attentive Intrigue held by the consumer). Meanwhile they refer also to the strength of the black bars on the inner circle, which demonstrate the strength of impact this attribute could possibly have on the consumer (for example, Colour is strong, Intrigue is fairly strong and Gender is weak).
The design decisions made during the process are noted down and detailed by the designer. In this case notations about gender-neutral colours to match the target market are conceptualised, including the impact the same colours will have upon consumers attention. In this case the colour Silver was decided upon, as it was both gender neutral and it was bright enough to generate attention.
The wheel is then rotated, the next attribute consulted and notes made accordingly. This is done until the wheel has rotated 360 degrees and all visceral hedonic attributes have been addressed.
Figure 40: Hypothetical Scenario of the Tool Application (Continued)
4 Attribute + Relationship
Design Notes5
Work Through Wheel6
164
Designer X then refers to the collected notes made from all attributes of the wheel and refines the concept of the mobile telephone using the recommendations of the tool.
A final concept design is produced.
Figure 40: Hypothetical Scenario of the Tool Application (Continued)
10.2 Contribution and Transfer of Knowledge
The findings from this research convey new knowledge relevant to product designers
and the wider design domain, as well as to relevant marketing and consumer-
orientated fields. It primarily provides the answers to the main aim of this research,
which was to identify visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in the design of interactive
products. As the research problem outlined in Chapter 1 suggests, the prolongation of
a product’s lifespan can be achieved by promoting a strong emotional attachment
between the consumer and the product. Such an attachment can be created via the
immediate visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in the product’s design. This may reduce
the number of unwanted products being discarded as excess landfill before their time.
7 Re-design from Notes
8 Final Concept
165
Meikle (2005) describes the visceral aspects of an object’s appearance as colour,
texture, shape and sound. Bolchini, Pulido and Faiola’s (2009) work argues that
visceral properties of an interactive product are the look, feel and sound. This study
builds on these understandings by providing the results to Research Question One, in
identifying visceral hedonic rhetoric categories to be: colour, size, shape, intrigue,
material, perceived usability, perceived function, novelty, analogy, brand, quality,
texture and gender.
In addition to identifying a visceral hedonic rhetoric hierarchy of attribute categories
based on the response occurrence frequency, this research provides qualitative data
that assists in the understanding of each visceral hedonic rhetoric category under
investigation. More significantly, this research identifies seven relationships within
the visceral hedonic rhetoric categories that designers may use to their advantage
when designing future products. The most novel and significant finding of this
research, these relationships and the identification of the overall categories of
visceral rhetoric, will affect the likelihood of a hedonic product-consumer
relationship and attachment. This is demonstrated and discussed in Chapter 9,
through the creation of the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue (Figure 36).
This understanding of visceral hedonic rhetoric is not only a significant contribution
to design knowledge, but is also applicable to many other domains. For example,
marketing and advertising areas stand to benefit from knowledge of consumer
hedonic behaviour with products and subsequent purchase decisions.
This research further contributes to previous work involving the establishment of the
visceral level of cognition (Norman, 2004). Findings relating to the emotional
impacts of visceral hedonic rhetoric will add to the newly forged research area within
emotional design. The discovery and definition of this novel area is a significant
outcome of this study, given the infancy of emotional design research. The
establishment of this field of research also contributes to new knowledge pertaining
to how the design of a product induces pleasurable experiences in the consumer
(Jordan, 2000).
166
This study builds on a significant body of research on related topics (Norman, 2004;
Norman and Ortony, 2003; Meikle, 2005; Bolchini, Pulido and Faiola, 2009). As
well as forging and defining the new research area of “visceral hedonic rhetoric”, it
also contributes new knowledge to the separate research areas of visceral design,
consumer hedonics and product rhetoric.
As first outlined in Chapter 6, the major gaps in the literature pertain to various
aspects of the visceral hedonic rhetoric foundation of this research. The contribution
to new knowledge made by this study assists in filling some of the gaps identified
(Table 10).
Table 10: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Literature Gap Contribution
Literature Gap Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Contribution
The newly emerging field of design and emotion requires more investigation to address product design and the emotional impact it can cause.
This study adds to the investigation into the field of ‘Design and Emotion’ by exploring how visceral hedonic rhetoric in the design of products can cause an emotional response in the consumer.
There is minimal research linking the visceral level of emotional cognition to the realm of product design and its implications for product properties.
This study strengthens the link between the visceral level of emotional cognition and product attributes, as well as providing a conceptual tool to address the implications for designers.
A tool, framework or rhetoric must be developed for use in designing for the visceral, and specifically, the visceral hedonic.
This study establishes the visceral hedonic rhetoric design dialogue as well as the visceral hedonic rhetoric design tool to assist designers and the academic realm with a uniting theory of visceral hedonic rhetoric.
There is currently an absence of a universal and cross-disciplinary theory of design rhetoric, common to all disciplines of liberal art, to act as a post office for transferrable theory and tools between fields.
This study adds to the theory on product rhetoric in an approach which could be built upon later to create a universal theory for all fields of design.
There is no available information linking the study of visceral hedonic behaviour to product use, consumption or purchase decisions.
This study contributes by addressing visceral hedonic responses of consumers at the initial point of interaction with the product. The later decision to purchase and use the same product is insinuated through the positive responses gathered by the results. NB: Further work is needed to ascertain the purchase behaviour and use involved with the visceral response, This would involve investigating the other two levels of emotional cognition (behavioural and reflective); this is outlined further in 10.5: Future Work .
Additionally, this study highlights the importance and complexity of visceral hedonic
rhetoric in the area of emotional design. The formulation of this new area provides
the missing link in creating the ultimate product, a product whose design harnesses
the full potential of visceral hedonic rhetoric to attract and engage a consumer upon
167
initial interaction. Due to the immediate nature and significance of the visceral level
of cognition, it is this study’s recommendation (as discussed earlier in Chapter 2) that
the visceral level should be addressed first by designers before the other two levels of
cognition: behavioural and reflective (Norman, 2004). This recommendation adds to
the campaign for future work to be conducted: work that triangulates these three
levels of cognition in order to determine their impact and level of importance when
designing for emotion.
10.3 Implications
As previously discussed, this research provides a number of findings that concur with
previous research conducted on product design properties. However, previous
research has been further developed by this study as it identifies new knowledge
pertaining to visceral hedonic rhetoric and its immediate effect on consumers. The
combination of results, such as the hierarchy of visceral hedonic rhetoric and the
relationships between the responses, provides a framework to aid in design of
products for prolonged consumer attachment.
The findings of this study have the potential to advance the design of products
towards an enhancement of hedonic content, and in turn, inducing a positive
consumer mindset. These positive emotions may then promote a more sustainable
product attachment, prompting consumers to keep products for a longer period of
time, thus extending the normal product lifecycle. This study has found that a
product’s visceral hedonic rhetoric or content and application of the visceral hedonic
rhetoric design tool (Figure 39) become paramount in the design process that can
create such a product relationship or attachment on immediate and initial interaction.
In addition, implications of this research may stem far beyond product design to a
wider audience. One of those possible future domains is the business sector,
specifically marketing and advertising, as part of the literature reviewed arose from
these two disciplines. The need for retailers, salespeople and designers to appeal to
consumers’ desires is paramount (Underhill, 2000). The purchase decisions
consumers make are a direct result of consumer choice behaviour and responses
168
(Clark, 1966). By targeting consumers’ positive purchase emotions and by
harnessing the consumer-product relationship generated by visceral hedonic rhetoric,
positive, longer lasting consumer attachments to interactive products may result.
10.4 Limitations
This research is limited to the visceral hedonic rhetoric evident in interactive
products (mobile telephones, Mp3 players and USB memory flash drives). Other
interactive products may need to be tested in the future to expand the scope of
products tested. The methodology was designed specifically to present real product
stimuli to the participants to stimulate real responses. The number of (thirty)
participants involved in the study is also a limitation of the work. Participants were
recruited partly through the university and partly through a local newspaper. This,
and the limited age bracket of participants (between 18 to 24 years of age), may have
had an effect on participant sampling. All of the information collected from these
participants relied on their ability to communicate honestly and to clearly articulate
their immediate thoughts. These findings are limited to responses given to the six
different product samples in each interactive product category. Demographics such
as age, gender, culture and background were carefully considered when selecting
participants to ensure as little bias as possible. Also the fact that the visceral hedonic
rhetoric design tool is not yet fully developed and is yet to be validated is another
limitation of this study. This study was restricted to the locale of Brisbane,
Queensland, and while participants were of various nationalities, the possibility of
different cultural interpretations is also a limitation.
10.5 Future Work
Firstly, this study provides the foundation for future research into visceral hedonic
rhetoric and opens future paths of investigation. Further studies involving other
interactive product types are needed to confirm if the same hierarchy and
relationships apply. The focus of this study was to investigate the age bracket of 18-
24 year olds, as this age group are the biggest consumers of the interactive products
selected. Also, various demographics of participants should be investigated to try to
169
identify any commonalities or discrepancies between ages, genders, professions and
cultures. Additionally, further investigation is needed into what specific attributes
within the visceral rhetoric category cause hedonic responses, not only in interactive
products but also as a conglomerate in design. The scope of this study was to explore
visceral hedonic rhetoric as the field is largely unexplored. While it has successfully
allowed definition of visceral hedonic rhetoric properties evident in interactive
products, this could be further explored to discover, for example, what colour, or
range of colours, are hedonically the strongest. Such investigation could be
conducted for each of the visceral hedonic rhetoric attributes or categories.
Determining the specifics within these results could provide credible blueprints for
designers to maximise the full power of visceral hedonic rhetoric in their designs.
Secondly, this research identifies new design knowledge in the form of the
relationships shared between certain visceral hedonic categories. As the implications
section suggests, the findings of this study can be translated into a method or tool for
practising designers to consider and implement in their own design process. If
method or tool were used by designers, the resultant products could then be assessed
to identify the effect that visceral hedonic rhetoric has on the final design outcome.
The product designed with visceral hedonic rhetoric could also then be evaluated on
its success in prolonging the life of the product.
Thirdly, this research has identified and presented the novel area of visceral hedonic
rhetoric and has outlined its importance to designers; however, a possible future area
of investigation could be the comparison between the three various levels of
cognition [as outlined by Norman (2004)] and the relationship of their hedonic
affects. Studies into behavioural hedonic rhetoric and reflective hedonic rhetoric
could be further explored and compared against their impact on the consumer-
product relationship and how that affects the emotional attachment of the product.
Fourthly, the conceptual visceral hedonic rhetoric design tool needs to be taken from
the conceptual stages through to a polished working design tool, either as a physical
object or a piece of interactive software that designers can access. Subsequent testing
170
of the tool by designers would then need to take place. If successful, the infiltration
and implementation into design practice and education facilities would be possible.
Finally, the application of these findings to the business and marketing research
fields of consumer purchase decisions and consumer hedonic behaviour could be
investigated. Addressing the issues pertaining to visceral hedonic rhetoric at an
earlier stage in the product development cycle could change the entire product
market position. Allowing for companies to design not more products with a shorter
lifespan, but better products with a longer more sustainable one, could have
significant effects on the sustainability of society.
10.6 The Final Word
This research makes a significant contribution to the emerging field of visceral
hedonic rhetoric. This research identifies what product properties induce such a
response and ranks them according to frequency of occurrence rate. This research
makes a significant contribution to new knowledge in the emerging field of visceral
hedonic rhetoric by allowing designers to better consider the overall design elements
of a product and what effects that will have on consumer responses. These findings
provide for future work to be conducted in this area of design and emotion, as well as
in other domains such as advertising and marketing. Its outcomes could make it
possible to ensure product longevity at the early stages of the product development
cycle.
An important final comment is that the purpose of this research has been to activate
awareness of visceral hedonic rhetoric and the impact it has on the consumer’s
immediate visceral response. Its further aim has been to stimulate future
investigation by suggesting possible lines of research in a field that is still largely
unexplored. The hope is that this work is only a first step in a long exploratory effort
to come.
171
172
173
References
Adam, G. (2010). Visceral perception: Understanding internal cognition. New York:
Plenum Press.
Adaval, R. (2001). Sometimes it just feels right: The differential weighting of affect-
consistent and affect-inconsistent product information. Journal of Consumer
Research, 28, 1–17.
Akrich, M. (1992). The description of technical objects. In W. Bijker and J. Law
(Eds), Shaping technology/building society. New York: MIT Press, 209-224.
Anderson, R. (1986). Consumer dissatisfaction: The effect of disconfirmed
expectancy on perceived product performance. Journal of Marketing
Research, 10, 38-44.
Ashby, F., Isen, A. and Turken, U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive
effects and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106(3), 529-
550.
Ashby, G. and Townsend, J. (1986). Varieties of Perceptual Independence.
Psychological Review, 93(2), 154-179.
Ashby, M., Brechet, Y., Cebon, D. and Salvo, L. (2004). Selection strategies for
materials and processes. Materials and Design, 29, 51-67.
Ashby, M. and Johnson, K. (2003). The art of material selection. Materials Today,
6(12), 24-35.
Aslam, M. (2006). Are you selling the right colour? A cross cultural review of colour
as a marketing cue. Journal of Marketing Communication, 12(1), 15-30.
Aumer-Ryan, K. and Hatfield, E. (2007). The design of everyday hate: A qualitative
and quantitative analysis. Interpersonal, 1(2), 143–172.
Axelsson, A. (2010). Perceptual and Personal: Swedish young adults and their use of
mobile telephones. New Media Society, 12(35), 35–47.
Babin, B. and Babin, L. (2001). Seeking something different? A model of schema
typically, consumer affect, purchase intentions and perceived shopping value.
Journal of Business Research, 54.
174
Babin, B., Darden, W. and Babin, L. (1998). Negative emotions in marketing
research: Affect or artefact. Journal of Business Research, 42, 271–285.
Bagozzi, R., Gopinath, M. and Nyer, P. (1999). The role of emotions in marketing.
Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 184–206.
Bar, M. (2007). The proactive brain: Using analogies and associations to generate
predictions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(7).
Barthes, R. (1977). Rhetoric of the image. In image music text. New York: Hill and
Wang.
Barrett, L., Mesquita, B., Ochsner, K. and Gross, J. (2007). The experience of
emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 373–403.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of
consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170.
Baxter, M. (1995). Product design: a practical guide to systematic methods of new
product development. London: Chapman and Hall.
Beaver, S. (2010) Consumer concepts’ of materials. PhD Thesis, Queensland
University of Technology, Brisbane.
Berkowitz, M. (1987). Product shape as a design innovation strategy. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 4, 274-283.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image
understanding. Psychological Review, 94(2), 115-147.
Blackler, A. (2008). Intuitive interaction with complex artefacts: Empirically-based
research. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag.
Blaich, R. (1989). Forms of design. Product Semantics Conference 1989, University
of Industrial Arts, Helsinki, Finland.
Bloch, P. (1995). Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response.
Journal of Marketing, 59, 16-29.
Bloch, P., Brunel, F. and Arnold, T. (2003). Individual differences in the centrality of
visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer
Research, 29(4), 551.
Bolchini, D., Pulido, D. and Faiola, A. (2009, August). Paper in screen: Prototyping,
an agile technique to anticipate the mobile experience. Interactions.
Booth, W. (1983). The rhetoric of fiction. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
175
Borgman, A. (1987). Technology and the character of contemporary life: a
philosophical inquiry. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
Bottomley, P. and Doyle, J. (2006). The interactive effects of colours and products
on perceptions of brand logo appropriateness. Marketing Theory, 6(1).
Branco, J., Dias, N., Ginoulhiac, M., Branco, R. and Branco, V. (2001). From
Aristotle to Damasio: Towards a rhetoric on interaction. Paper presented at
the 3rd International Design and Emotion Conference.
Brave, S. and Nass, C. (2002). Emotion in human computer interaction. In J. Jacko
and A. Sears (Eds), Handbook of human-computer interaction. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brian, D. and Lou, H. (1993). Flash memory goes mainstream. IEEE Press, 48–52.
Buchanan, R. (1985). Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument and demonstration
in design practice. Design Issues, 2(1), 4–22.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–
21.
Buchanan, R. (1995). Rhetoric, humanism and design. In Buchanan, R. and
Margolin, V. (Eds) Discovery design-explorations in design studies. The
University of Chicago Press. Chicago, 23-66.
Buchanan, R. (2001). Design and the new rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 34(3),
183–206.
Buchanan, R. and Margolin, V. (1995). Discovering design: Explorations in design
studies. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Bucquoye, M. and Danne, J. (2007). Forms with Fantasy. Oostkamp: Stichting
Kunstboek.
Bulmer, S. and Buchanan-Oliver, M. (2006). Visual rhetoric and global advertising
imagery. Journal of Marketing Communications, 12(1), 49-61.
Burns, A. (2000). Emotion and urban experience: Implications for design. Design
Issues, 16(3), 67–79.
Butter, R. (1989). The practical side of theory-an approach to the application of
product semantics. Product Semantics Conference 1989, University of
Industrial Arts, Helsinki, Finland.
Cagan, J. and Vogel, C. (2002). Creating Breakthrough products: Innovation from
product planning to programme approval. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
176
Calne, D. (2000). Within reason: Rationality and human behaviour. New York:
Vintage Books.
Candi, M. (2005). Design as an element of Innovation: Evaluating design emphasis
and focus in new technology-based firms. Reykjavik University, Reykjavik.
Candi, M. (2007). The role of design in the devolvement of technology based
services. Design Studies, 28, 559-583.
Campbell, C. (1987). The romantic ethic and the spirit of modern capitalism.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Chitturi, R. (2009). Emotions by design: a consumer perspective. International
Journal of Design, 3(2), 7–17.
Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R. and Mahajan, V. (2007). Form versus function: How
the intensities of specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade
offs mediate product preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4),
702–714.
Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R. and Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by Design: The role
of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing,724(3), 48–63.
Clark, L. (1966). Consumer behaviour: The dynamics of consumer reaction. New
York: New York University Press.
Clarke, T. and Costall, A. (2007). The emotional connotations of colour: A
qualitative investigation. Colour Research and Application, 33(5), 406-410.
Coates, D. (2003). Watches tell more than time: Product design, information and the
quest for elegance. London: McGraw-Hill.
Cooper, T. (2000). Product development implications of sustainable consumptions.
The Design Journal, 3(2), 46-44.
Cooper, R. (2001). Winning at new products (3rd Edition). Cambridge: Perseus
Publishing.
Cox, D. and Locander, W. (1987). Product novelty: Does it moderate the relationship
between Ad attitudes and brand attitudes? Journal of Advertising, 16(3), 39-
44.
Crawford, D. (1974). Kant’s aesthetic theory. London: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Crilly, N., Moultrie, J. and Clarkson, J. (2004). Seeing Things: Consumer response to
the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25(6), 547-577.
177
Crilly, N., Moultrie, J. and Clarkson, J. (2008). Shaping things: Intended consumer
response and other determinants of product form. Design Studies, 52(12),
224-254.
Crozier, L. (1994). Manufactured pleasures: physiological responses to design.
Manchester: Manchester Press.
Crusen, M. and Snelders, D. (2002). Product appearance and consumer pleasure. In
W. S. Green and P. W. Jordan (Eds), Pleasure with products beyond
usability. London: Taylor and Francis.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Robinson, R. (1990). The art of seeing: an interpretation
of the aesthetic experience. Los Angles: Paul Getty Museum.
Cupchik, G. (1999). Emotion and industrial design: reconciling means and feelings.
1st International conference on Design and Emotion, Delft, The Netherlands,
78-82.
D’Andrade, R. and Egan, M. (1974). The colours of emotion. American Ethnologist,
1(1), 49-63.
Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New
York: G.P. Putnam.
Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making
of consciousness. London: Harcourt.
Damasio, A. (2001). Some notes on brain, imagination and creativity. In K. H.
Pfenninger and V. R. Shibik (Eds), The origins of creativity. Oxford: Oxford
Press.
Damasio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain.
Orlando, Florida: Harcourt.
Davis, F. (1989). Usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of
information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3),
319-340.
Davis, G. (2002). Prolonging the pleasure. In W. S. Green and P. W. Jordan (Eds),
Pleasure with products: Beyond usability. London: Taylor and Francis.
Dawar, N. and Parker, P. (1994). Marketing universals: Consumers’ use of brand
name, price, physical appearance, and retailer reputation as signals of product
quality. The Journal of Marketing, 58, 81–95.
178
de Medeiros, W. and Ashton, P. (2006). Issues in formulating research methods to
access the meaningful responses of men to product shapes. In L. Feijs, S.
Kyffin and B. Young (Eds) Design and semantics of form and movement.
Design and Semantics of Form and Movement, 46-59.
Demirbilek, O. and Sener, B. (2001). Emotionally rich products: The effect of
childhood heroes, comics and cartoon characters. Paper presented at the 3rd
International Design and Emotion Conference.
Demirbilek, O. and Sener, B. (2003). Product design, semantics and emotional
response. Ergonomics, 46(13), 1346–1360.
Denton, H., McDonagh, D., Baker, S. and Wormald, P. (2001). Introducing the
student designer to the role of emotion in design. Paper presented at the 3rd
International Design and Emotion Conference.
Desmet, P. (2002). Designing emotions. The Netherlands: TU Delft.
Desmet, P. (2003). A multilayered model of product emotions. The Design Journal,
6(2), 4–13.
Desmet, P. and Hekkert, P. (2002). The basis of product emotions. In W. S. Green
and P. W. Jordan (Eds), Pleasure with products beyond usability (pp. 61–68).
London: Taylor and Francis.
Desmet, P., Overbeeke, O. and Tax, S. (2001). Designing products with emotional
value: Development and application of an approach for research through
design. The Design Journal, 4(1), 32–47.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and
utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37, 60–71.
Dholokia, U. and Rego, L. (1998). What makes commercial web pages so popular?
An empirical investigation of web page effectiveness. European Journal of
Marketing Research, 32(7/8), 724–736.
Dieter, G. (1991). Engineering Design (3rd Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dinnin, A. (2009). The appeal of our new stuff: How newness creates value.
Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 261–265.
Dittmar, H. (1992). A social psychology of material possessions: to have is to be.
New York: St Martins Press.
Dumas, J. and Redish, J. (1994). A practical guide to usability testing. New Jersey:
Ablex.
179
Ellsworth, P. and Scherer, K. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R.
Davidson, H. Goldsmith and K. Scherer (Eds), Handbook of the effective
sciences. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 572-595.
Erlhoff, M. and Marshall, T. (2007). Design dictionary. Berlin: Birkhauser.
Fiedler, K., and Bless, H. (2000). The information of beliefs at the interface of
affective and cognitive processes. In. Frijda, N. (eds) Emotions and Beliefs,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Flavell, J. (1977). Cognitive Development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
Flavian, C., Guinaliv, M. and Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived
usability: Satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information
Management, 46.
Flick, U. (2006). Qualitative evaluation research between methodology and practice.
In U. Flick (Ed.), Qualitative evaluation research (pp. 9–29). Reinbek:
Rowohlt.
Forlizzi, J., Disalvo, C. and Hanington, B. (2003). On the relationship between
emotion, experience and the design of new products. The Design Journal,
6(2), 29–38.
Forlizzi, J., Gemperle, F. and Disalvo, C. (2003). Perspective sorting: A method for
understanding responses to products. Proceedings of Designing Pleasurable
Products and Interfaces. Pittsburgh: USA, 103-108.
Forlizzi, J., Mutlu, B. and Disalvo, C. (2001). A study of how products contribute to
the emotional aspects of human experience. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon
University.
Forty, A. (1986). Objects of Desire. New York: Pantheon Books.
Fowler, H. (1991). Oxford English Dictionary (8th Edition). Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Foxall, G. (1998). Consumers in context: The BPM research program. London:
Roobledge Catham Ltd.
Frederick, S. and Loewenstein, G. (1999). Hedonic Adaption, In: Well-being: the
foundations of Hedonic Psychology, Russell Sage Foundation Press.
Fukuda, R. (2009). Influence of user experience, In: Jacko, J. (eds) Human-Computer
Interaction, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 615–620.
Garvin, D. (1986). What does product quality really mean? Sloan Management
180
Review, 26(1), 25-44.
Gaver, W. (1999). Irrational aspects of technology: Anecdotal evidence. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the first International Conference on Design
and Emotion.
Gaver, W. (2009). Designing for emotion: amongst other things. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society, 364, 3597-3604.
Gemperle, F., Kasabach, C., Stivoric, J., Bauer, M. and Martin, R. (1998). Design for
Wearability. Paper presented at the International Symposium Wearable
Computing, California, IEEE CS Press, 116-122.
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink, the power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little
Brown.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York: Little Brown.
Givechi, R. and Velazquez, V. (2001). Positive space. Paper presented at the 3rd
International Design and Emotion Conference.
Goldenberg, J. and Mazursky, D. (2002). Creativity in Product information.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gomez, R., Popovic, V. and Bucolo, S. (2008). Emotional driving experiences. In P.
Desmet, K. van Erp and M. Karlsson (Eds), Design and emotion moves. UK:
Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 141-164.
Gordon, W. (2006). Out with the new, in with the old. International Journal of
Market Research, 48(1), 7-25.
Gorn, G., Chattopadhyay, A., Yi, T. and Dahl, D. (1997). Effects of colour as an
executional cue in advertising. Management Science, 43(10), 1387-1400.
Greiman, A. (1990). Hybrid Imagery: the fusion of technology and graphic design.
New York: Watson-Guptill Publishing.
Gubrium, J, and Holstein, J. (2002) Handbook of interview research: Context and
method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Han, S., Yun, M., Kwahk, J. and Hong, S. (2001). Usability of consumer electronic
products. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 28, 143-151.
Hansen, F. (1972). Consumer choice behaviour: A cognitive theory. New York: USA,
The Free Press.
Hassenzahl, M. (2004). The interplay of beauty. Goodness, and usability in
interactive products. Human Computer Interaction, 19, 319–349.
181
Hassenzahl, M. (2001). The effect of perceived hedonic quality on product
appealingness. International Journal of Human Centred Interaction, 13(4),
481-499.
Haug, C. (1996) Design for ease of use: product semantics and design education.
PhD Thesis, The Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester.
Hekkert, P. (2002). Design aesthetics: Principles of pleasure in design. Psychology
Science, 48(2), 157–172.
Helander, M. and Tham, M. (2003). Hedonomics-affective human factor design.
Ergonomics, 46(13), 1269-1272.
Hirschman, E. (1980). Innovativeness, novelty seeking and consumer creativity. The
Journal of Consumer Research, 3(3), 283-295.
Hirschman, E. and Holbrok, M. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts.
Methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46, 92–101.
Hirschman, E. and Stern, B. (1999). The roles of emotion in consumer research.
Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 4-11.
Holbrook, M. (1986). Aims, concepts and methods for the representation of
individual differences in aesthetics responses to design features. Journal of
Consumer Research Research, 13(December), 337-347.
Holbrook, M. and Schindler, R. (1994). Age, sex and attitude toward the past as
predicators of consumers aesthetic tastes for cultural products. Journal of
Marketing Research, 31(3).
Holland, G. (2010). A periodic table of form: The secret language of surface and
meaning in product design. Alchemy Labs Report, 1-10.
Hopkinson, G. and Pujari, D. (1999). A factor analytic study of the sources of
meaning in hedonic consumption. European Journal of Marketing, 33(3/4),
273–290.
Houghton, L., Calvert, E., Jackson, N., Cooper, P. and Whorwell, P. (2002). Visceral
sensation and emotion: A study using hypnosis. Gut, 51(5), 701–704.
Hoyer, W. (1984). An examination of consumer decision making for a common
repeat purchase product. The Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 822-829.
Huang, M (2001). The theory of emotions in marketing. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 16(2) Winter.
Jacobs, J. (1999). How to teach, design, produce and sell product related emotions.
182
Paper presented at the Proceedings of the first International Conference on
Design and Emotion.
Jordan, P. (1997). Putting the pleasure into products. IEE Review.
Jordan, P. (1998). An introduction to usability. London: Taylor and Francis.
Jordan, P. (1998). Human factors for pleasure in product use. Applied Ergonomics,
29(1), 25–33.
Jordan, P. (2000). Designing pleasurable products. New York: Taylor and Francis.
Julier, G. (2000). The Culture of Design. London: Sage Publications.
Karana, E., Hekkert, P. and Kandanchar, P. (2008). Material considerations in
product design: A survey on crucial material selection used by product
designers. Materials and Design, 29, 1081-1089.
Kaufer, D. and Butler, B. (1996). Rhetoric and the art of design. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Khalid, H. (2006). Embracing diversity in user needs for affective design. Applied
Ergonomics, 37, 409-418.
Khalid, H. and Helander, M. (2006). Customer emotional needs in product design.
Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 14(3), 197–206.
Kivetz, R. and Simonson, I. (2002). Self-control for the righteous: Towards a theory
of precommitment to indulgence. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 199–
217.
Kotler, P. and Murali, K. (1985). Flawed Products: Consumer responses to Marketer
Strategies. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2(3), 27–37.
Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading the image: The grammar of visual
design. London: Routledge.
Kurtgozu, A. (2002). From function to emotion: A critical essay on the history of
Design Arguments. The Design Journal, 6(2), 49–59.
Kurvinen, E. (2001). Emotions in action: A case in mobile visual communication.
Paper presented at the 3rd International Design and Emotion Conference.
Langrish, J. and Lin, S. (1992). Product Semantics - any use? In S. Vihma (Eds),
Objects and images: studies in design and advertising. Finland: University of
Industrial Arts Press, 132-135.
LeDoux, J. (1995). Emotion: Clues from the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 46,
209-235.
183
LeDoux, J. (2000). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional
life. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Lennart, L. and Edwards, K. (2003). Design materials selection and marketing of
successful products. Materials and Design, 24, 519-529.
Levine, J. (2006). Not buying it: My year without shopping. New York: Free Press.
Lewalski, Z. (1988). Product aesthetics: an interpretation for designers. Carson
City: Design and Development Engineering Press.
Levy, S. (1959). Symbols for Sale. Harvard Business Review, 37(4), 117-124.
Lim, Y., Donaldson, J., Jung, H., Kunz, B., Royer, D., Ramalingingam, S.,
Thirmaran, S. and Stolterman, E. (2008). Emotional experience and
interaction design, affect and emotion. HCI 2008.
Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C. and Brown, J. (2006). Attention web
designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good impression! Behaviour
and Information Technology, 25(2), 115-126.
Livingstone, M. and Hubel, D. (1988). Segregation of form, colour, movement and
depth: Anatomy, physiology and perception. Science, 240(4853), 740-749.
Liu, Y. (2003). Engineering aesthetics and aesthetic ergonomics: Theoretical
foundations and a dual process research methodology. Ergonomics,
46(13/14), 1273-1292.
Ljungberg, L. and Edwards, K. (2003). Design, materials selection and marketing of
successful products. Materials and Design, 24, 519-529.
Lough, W. (2006). Once more with feeling. Knoxville: University of Tennessee.
Luce, M., Beetman, J. and Payne, J. (2001). Emotional decisions, tradeoff difficulty
and coping in consumer choice. Chicago: The university of Chicago Press.
MacDonald, A. (2000). Aesthetic intelligence; optimising user-centred design.
Journal of Engineering Design, 12(1), 37-45.
Mahlke, S. (2008). Visual aesthetics and the user experience. In Proceedings of the
study of visual aesthetics in HCI, 1-6.
Mahlke, S., Lemke, I. and Thuring, M. (2007). The diversity of non-instrumental
qualities in human technology interaction. MMI-Interactive, 13(August).
Mahlke, S. and Lindgaard, G. (2007). Emotional experiences quality perceptions of
interactive products. Human Centered Interaction Conference 2007.
Margolin, V. (1997). Getting to know the user. Design Studies, 18(3), 227-236.
184
Maslow, A. (1970). Motorvation and personality (2nd ed.). Harper and Row, New
York.
Massey, D. (2002). A brief history of human society: the origin and role of emotion
in social life. The American Sociological Review, 67, 1-29.
Marzano, S. (1999). Creating value by design: Thoughts. Blaricum: Lund Humphries
Publishing.
Matthews, G. (2005). The design of emotionally intelligent machines. The American
Journal of Psychology, 118(2), 287.
Maturana, H. and Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the
living. Boston: Reidel Publishing.
Mayall, H. (1979). Principles in Design. London: Design Council.
McCoy, M. (1984). Defining a new functionalism in design innovation. The Journal
of Industrial Designers Society of America, 3(2), 16–19.
McDonagh-Philp, D. and Lebbon, C. (1999). The emotional domain in product
design. The Design Journal, 3(1), 31–43.
McDonagh, D., Bruseberg, A. and Haslam, C. (2002). Visual product evaluation:
Exploring users’ emotional relationships with products. Applied Ergonomics,
33, 221-240.
McDonagh, D., Hekkert, P., Erp, J. and Gyi, D. (2001). Design and emotion: The
experience of everyday things. London: Taylor and Francis.
McDonald, W. (1998). Consumer decision making and altered states of
consciousness: A study of dualities. Journal of Business Research, 42(1),
287–294.
McKeon, R. (1987). Rhetoric: Essays in invention and discovery. Woodbridge: Ox
Box Press.
McNeal, N. (1993). Development of consumer behavior patterns among Chinese
children. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(1), 45–59.
McQuarrie, E and Mick, D. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-imperative,
experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research,
26, 37-54.
Meikle, J. (2005). Ghosts in the machine. Technology and Culture, 46(2), 385.
Melamed, S. (2006). Applying blink theory to new product development. Innovation,
Winter, 52–55.
185
Meyers-Levy, J. and Sternthal, B. (1991). Gender differences in the use of message
cues and judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 28.
Mikellides, B. (1990). Colour and Physiological Arousal. Journal of Architectural
and Planning Review, 7(1), 13-19.
Minsky, M. (2005). Emotion machine. Retrieved 26 June 2010, from
http://www.media.mit.edu
Mitchell, D. and Ware, C. (1973). Interocular transfer of a visual after-effect in
normal steroblind humans, Journal of Physiology, 236, 707-721.
Mizerski, R. and White, D. (1986). Understanding and using emotions in advertising.
The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 3(4), 57-69.
Moles, S. (1996). An Information Theory and aesthetic perception. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press.
Monö, R. (1997). Design for product understanding. Sweden: Liber.
Morgan, C. and Starck, P. (1999). Starck. New York: Universe Publishing.
Morse, J. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research, handbook of qualitative
research. In Denzin, N. and Lincolin, S., (Eds) Handbook of qualitative
research, California: Sage Publications Inc, 220-235.
Mostek, T., Forbus, K. and Meverden, C. (2000) Dynamic case creation and
expansion for analogical reasoning, Proceedings of the AAAI 2000.
Mountcastle, V. (1980). Sensory receptors and neural encoding: Introduction to
sensory process. In: Medical Physiology (14th Edition). St Louis: Mosby.
Mugge, R., Schoormans, J and Schifferstein, H. (2005). Design strategies to
postpone consumers product replacement: The value of a strong person-
product relationship. The Design Journal, 8(2), 38-48.
Murphy, G. and Medin, D. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence.
Psychological Review, 92(July), 289-316.
Neisser, U. (2009). Cognitive psychology. Grolier multimedia encyclopaedia.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
Norman, D. (2002). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
Norman, D. (2004). Emotional design. New York: Basic Books.
Norman, D. and Ortony, A. (2003). Designers and users: Two perspectives on
emotion and design. Proceedings of FID 2003.
186
Norman, D., Ortony, A. and Russell, P. (2003). Affect and machine design: lessons
for the development of autonomous machines, IBM Systems Journal, 42(1),
38-44.
O’Shaughnessy, J (1992). Explaining buyer behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
O’Shaughnessy, J and O’Shaughnessy, N. (2003). The marketing power of emotion.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Oliveira, E., and Sarmento, L. (2003). Emotion: Emotional advantage for
adaptability and autonomy. Paper presented at the 2nd International joint
conference on autonomous agents and multi-tangent systems.
Oliveto, G. (2008). Market research explained. Amsterdam: ESOMAR Publications.
Opperud, A. (2002). A semiotic product analysis. Paper presented at the Design and
Emotion Conference, Loughborough, UK, 137-141.
Ou, C. and Luo, M. (2004). Colour preferences and colour emotion. In McDonagh,
D., Hekkert, P., vanErp, J. and Gyi, D. (eds) Design and Emotion, Taylor and
Francis: London.
Overbeeke, K. and Hekkert, P. (1999). Editorial. Paper presented at the Proceedings
of the first International Conference on Design and Emotion.
Palmer, J. (1996). Introduction to Part 1. Palmer, J. and Dodson, M. (eds) Design
and aesthetics, Routledge: London.
Park, C., Milberg, S. and Lawson, R. (1991). Evaluation of Brand extensions: The
role of Product feature similarity and Brand concept consistency. Journal of
Consumer Research, 18 (September), 185-193.
Parmar, A. (2004). Marketers Ask: hues on first? Marketing News, 15th February, 8-
10.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. California: Sage
publications Inc.
Patton, W. (1968). Materials in Industry. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
Pawle, J. and Cooper, P. (2006). Measuring Emotion- Lovemarks, The future beyond
brands. Journal of Advertising Research, March (2006), 38-48.
Pennebaker, J. (1995). Beyond laborartory based cardiac perception, Ecological
interception. In D. Vaitl and R. Schundry (Eds), From heart to Brain.
Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
187
Perina, P. (2004). Rhetoric in design. PhD Thesis, Curtin University, Australia.
Picard, R. (2000). Affective computing. Columbia: MIT Press.
Pomerleau, A., Boldue, D., Malcuit, G. and Cossette, L. (1990). Pink or Blue:
Environmental gender stereotypes in the first two years of life. Sex Roles,
22(5/6), 359-371.
Popovic, V. (2001). Product evaluation methods and their importance in designing
interactive artifacts. In W. Green and P. Jordan (Eds), Human factors in
product design: Current practice and future trends. London: Taylor and
Francis, 367-376.
Porter, S., Chibber, S. and Porter, J. (2001). Towards an understanding of pleasure in
product design. Proceedings of 3rd IDEC 2001.
Postrel, V. (2003). The substance of style: how the rise of aesthetic value is remaking
commerce, culture and consciousness. New York: Harper Collins.
Preece, J., Rogers, Y. and Sharp, H. (2002) Interaction Design: Beyond Human-
Computer Interaction, John Wiley and Sons. New York.
Prelec, D. and Loewenstein, G. (1997). Beyond time discounting. Marketing Letters,
8(1), 97-108.
Pye, D. (1978). The nature and aesthetics of design. London: Barny and Jenkins.
Raman, N. and Leckerby, J. (1998). Factors affecting consumer’s webad visits.
European Journal of Marketing, 32(7/8), 737-748.
Rao, A., Qu, L. and Ruukert, R. (1999). Signalling unobservable product quality
through a brand ally. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 258-268.
Ratneshwar, S., Shocker, A. and Stewart, D. (1987). Toward understanding the
attraction effect: the implications of product stimulus meaningfulness and
familiarity. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 520-533.
Redstrom, J. (2006). Persuasive design: Fringes and foundation. In W. Ijsselsteijn, Y.
De Kort, C. Midden, B. Eggen, and E. van der Hogan (Eds) Persuasive
technology: First international conference, Persuasive 2006. Eindhoven,
May 18–19 Proceedings Springer, Berlin.
Reimann, R. (2005). Personas, goals and emotional design. Retrieved 24 March
2007, from www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/000019.php
188
Richins, M. and Bloch, P. (1986). After the new wears off: The temporal context of
product involvement. The Journal of Consumer Research, 3(2), 280-285.
Roberts, K. (2004) Lovemarks: The future beyond brands, New York: Powerhouse
Books.
Robins, D. and Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and the credibility in website design.
Information Processing and Management, 44, 386-399.
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research, Blackwell, Oxford.
Routio, P. (2002). Beauty of artefacts. Retrieved 2 June 2010, from
www.uiah.fi/projects/metodi/155.html
Russell, J. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construct of emotion.
Psychological Review, 110(1), 145–172.
Savas, O. (2001). A perspective on the person-product relationship: Attachment and
detachment. Paper presented at the 3rd International Design and Emotion
Conference.
Sawhney, R. and Huntting, D. (2007). Giving designs emotion. Machine Design,
79(8), 88.
Schifferstein, H., Mugge, R. and Hekkert, P. (2001). Designing consumer-product
attachment. Paper presented at the 3rd International Design and Emotion
Conference.
Schifferstein, H. and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim (2008). Consumer-Product attachment:
Measurement and design implications. International Journal of Design, 2(3),
1-14.
Schroeder, J. (2002). Visual consumption. London: Routledge.
Schwarz, N. (2000). Emotion, Cognition and Decision-making. In Smith, c. (eds)
Cognition and Emotion, Psychology Press, 14(4).
Scott, L. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric.
Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 252-273.
Seliger, M. (2008). Visual rhetoric in outdoor advertising. Proceedings of Design
Research Society Biennial Conference, Sheffield, UK, 16–19 July, 2008.
Seva, R., Duh, H. and Helander, M. (2006). The marketing implications of affective
product design. Applied Ergonomics, 38(6), 723–731.
Shannon, C. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System
Technical Journal, 27, 379-423.
189
Sistrunk, F. and McDavid, J. (1971). Sex variable in conforming behaviour. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 17(February), 200-2007.
Skov Holt, S. and Skov Holt, M. (2005). Blobjects and beyond: The new fluidity in
design. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
Slyke, C., Comunale, C. and Belanger, F. (2002). Gender differences in perceptions
of web based shopping. Communications of the ACM, 47(7), 82-86.
Smets, G., Overbeeke, C. (1995). Expressing tastes in packages. Design Studies,
16(3), 349-365.
Smets, G., Overbeeke, C. and Gaver, W. (1994). Form giving: expressing in the non-
obvious. Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference Proceedings, 77-
84.
Smith, C and Ellsworth, P. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813–838.
Solovyova, I. (2003). Conjecture and emotion: An investigation of the relationship
between design thinking and emotional content. In N. Cross and E. Edmonds
(Eds), Expertise in design: Design thinking research symposium 6. Sydney:
Creativity and Cognition Studios Press.
Stanton, N., Salmon, P., Walker, G., Baber, C. and Jenkins, D. (2005). Human factor
methods A practical guide for engineering and design. Cornwall: Ashgate
Publishing.
Stead, L., Goulev, P., Evans, C. and Mamdani, E. (2004). The emotional wardrobe.
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8, 282–290.
Strahilevitz, M. and Loewenstein, G. (1998). The effect of ownership history on the
valuation of objects. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(December).
Strahilevitz, M. and Myers, J. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives:
How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of
Consumer Research, 24(4), 434–446.
Suchman, L. (2004). Figuring personhood in sciences of the artificial. Department of
Sociology, Lancaster University.
Sudjic, D. (2008). The language of Things. Great Britain, Penguin Books.
Sutherland, M. (1993). Advertising and the mind of the consumer: what works, what
doesn’t and why. Allen and Unwin, St Leonards, NSW.
190
Tidd, J. and Bodley, K. (2002). The influence of product novelty on the new product
development process. Research and Development Management, 32(2), 127-
138.
Thomson, M., MacInnis, D. and Park, C. (2005). The ties that bind: Measuring the
strength of consumers, emotional attachments to brands. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 15(1), 77-91.
Underhill, P. (1999). Why we buy: The science of shopping. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Van Hemel, C. and Brezet, J. (1997). Eco-design; A promising approach to
sustainable production and consumption. Paris: United Nations
Environmental Programme.
Verganti, R. (2008). Design, meaning and radical innovation: A meta-model and a
research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(5), 436-
456.
Veryzer, R. and Hutchinson, W. (1998). The influence of unity and prototypicality
on aesthetic responses to new product designs. Journal of Consumer
Research, 24(4), 374.
Veryzer, R. (1993). Aesthetic response and influence of design principles on product
preferences. Advances in Consumer Research, 20, 224-228.
Villarreal, A. (2005). Products, new meaning it’s personal. Innovation, Spring, 27–
29.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Ware, C. (2003). Design as applied perception, In J, Carroll. (eds). HCI models,
theories and frameworks, Elsevier: USA.
Ware, C. (2004). Information Visualisation: Perception for design, China: Morgan
Kaufmann.
Weber, M. (1998). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (2nd ed.). Los
Angeles: Roxbury.
Weerdesteijn, J., Desmet, P. and Gielen, M. (2005). Moving design: To design
emotion through movement. The Design Journal, 8(1), 28–40.
Weiman, H. and Walter, O. (1957). Toward an analysis of ethics for rhetoric.
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 43(3), 266-270.
191
Weinberg, P. and Gottwald, W. (1982). Impulsive consumer buying as a result of
emotions. Journal of Business Research, 10, 43–57.
Wensveen, S., Overbeeke, C. and Djajadiningrat, J. (2000). Touch me, hit me and I
know how you feel. A design approach to emotionally rich interaction.
Proceedings of DIS 2000, Designing Interactive Systems. New York, pp. 48–
53.
Westwood, D. (2005). ‘Design and emotion: The experience of everyday things.
Ergonomics, 48(8), 10–57.
Winston, P. (1980). Learning and reasoning by analogy. Communications of the
ACM, 23(12), 689-703.
Wrigley, C., Gomez, R. and Popovic, V. (2010). The evaluation of qualitative
methods selection in the field of design and emotion. Proceedings of 7th IDEC
2010.
Wrigley, C., Popovic, V. and Chamorro-Koc, M. (2008). Hedonic visceral rhetoric:
Designing for the visceral. Proceedings of 6th IDEC 2008.
Wrigley, C., Popovic, V. and Chamorro-Koc, M. (2009). A methodological approach
to visceral hedonic rhetoric. Proceedings of 3rd IASDR 2009.
Yamamoto, M. and Lambert, D. (1994). The impact of product aesthetics on the
evaluation of industrial products. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 11.
Zachry, M. (2005). An interview with Donald Norman. Technical communications
quarterly, 14(4), 469-487.
Zeithaml, A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-
end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(July), 2-22.
Zhao, C., Popovic, V., Ferreira, L. and Xiaobo, L. (2008). Vehicle design research
for Chinese elderly drivers, In the proceedings Computer aided industrial
design and conceptual design 7th International conference, Hangzhou, 1-5.
Zheng, Y. and Kivetz, R. (2009). The differential promotion effectiveness on
hedonic versus utilitarian products. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 565.
192
193
Appendices
194
Appendix A: Participant Information Pack
195
196
Appendix B: Screening Questionnaire
197
198
Appendix C: Interview Instructions
Do you like the product?
What about the product do you or do you
not like?
Why?
Firstly thank you for being in my experiment today. I appreciate it very
much.
What I am going to do is show you 3 different types of products these
include Mobile telephones, MP3 player and USB memory sticks.
Each of these different types of products will be represented by 6
different individual products.
Each is covered by a white box.
I am going to show you the product and you won’t get very long to look
at it.
You cannot touch or pick up the products in front of you.
When I take away the product I want you to answer these questions they
are on the card in front of you if you forget. They are: Do you like the
product? What about the product do you or do you not like? Why?
You can describe as much as you like for as long as you like, there is no
time constraint on how long you talk for only on how long you can view
the product.
We are going to do this for each product so don’t worry you are allowed
to say the same thing more than once, if you have the same reaction.
There is no right or wrong answer to this experiment so please don’t feel
pressured by your responses just relax and we will get started.
Just remember you cannot touch the products and the questions are in
front of you.
199
Appendix D: Participant Demographics
Participant Demographics
Participant Age Nationality Occupation Participant 1- LC 24 Australian Administration Officer Participant 2- JF 21 Australian Student Participant 3- BB 22 Australian Student Participant 4-MM 23 Myanmar Engineer Participant 5- JS 24 Australian Store Manager – Retail Participant 6- NR 24 Australian Shop Assistant Participant 7- TW 19 Australian Student Participant 8 -RJ 20 Australian Diesel Fitter Participant 9- EW 18 Australian Sales representative Participant 10- CW 18 Australian Electrical Apprentice Participant 11- GB 23 Australian Electrical Engineer Participant 12- LH 20 Australian Student Participant 13- CB 21 Australian Student Participant 14- CI 21 Australian Government Project Officer Participant 15- SA 21 Australian Student Participant 16- BS 24 Australian Student Participant 17- ST 21 Australian Student Participant 18- TD 24 Australian Student Participant 19- CL 22 Australian Student Participant 20- BT 23 USA Marketer Participant 21- SG 24 Australian Medical engineer Participant 22- SL 23 Australian Designer Participant 23- NG 24 Australian Engineer Participant 24- CB 23 New Zealand Student Participant 25- LH 21 Australian Drafter Participant 26- ET 20 Australian Student Participant 27- MR 22 Australian Student Participant 28- JD 20 Asian Student Participant 29- LT 19 Asian Student Participant 30- RW 19 Australian Facility project officer
Age Span of Participants
Age Participants % 18 2 6.66 19 3 10 20 4 13.33 21 6 20 22 3 10 23 5 16.66 24 7 23.33
21.6 is the average age of the participants.
200
Nationality Span of Participants
Nationality Participants % Australian 25 83.33 Asian 3 10 European 0 0 New Zealand 1 3.33 USA 1 3.33
Occupation Span of Participants
Occupation Participants % Student 15 50 Administration 1 3.33 Engineer 4 13.33 Retail 3 10 Trade/ Labourer 2 6.66 Marketing 1 3.33 Designer 1 3.33 Drafting 1 3.33 Government 2 6.66
There were 22 male participants and 8 female participants.
Average frequency of use of interactive products
0
5
10
15
20
25
Never Seldom Moderatley Frequently Always
mobiletelephones mp3players usbmemoryflashdrives
% O
ccur
renc
es
201
Appendix E: Example Transcript
Product stimuli code Participant response MT 5: First thing I see is pink girls phone. It’s a flip phone, it’s one of
the functions. Screen on the front probably going to display time, stuff like that.
MT 4: Bulky, cumbersome, buttons aren’t in a normal layout. Nokia obviously. Odd shape not the standard rectangle.
MT 3: know that one well. I have owned that phone. Good thing small. Some people have problems with the buttons. I didn’t. I don’t know why. It has a very good texture on the back of it that’s my memory of it. You put it on a table it won’t slide. So I like that one.
MT 6: slide phone. LG. probably mid range in the price bracket. Um I probably wouldn’t own one.
MT 2: Very similar to the LG. I did notice the colour very vibrant. So it did attract my eye.
MT 1: Oh gees. That’s the lipstick phone I think they call it um. Yeah I wasn’t much of a fancy of it. I don’t know. You kind of need buttons and stuff. I like the tactical feel of a button. In saying that I do have an iPhoneiPhone.
USB 6: USB stick with a cover. Not very exciting. Spose the cover is decent for stopping the dust and stuff from getting in the USB.
USB 5: very bling (laugh) very bling. I probably wouldn’t have one I would I would say it is probably more of a girls item or a male that’s… (laugh)
USB 4: Interesting design. I actually like that, um. I don’t know it’s different the rounded bevelled edges and it was thin. A lot thinner than normal USB so I’m assuming it has a slider that comes out for the USB slot.
USB 3: that one is also interesting. Again with the slide function on it. Its gloss I don’t particularly like gloss even though I have an iPhone.
USB 2: First thing is that it’s see through. So you can see the internal pcb in it kind of creates a tacky feel I don’t know why.
USB 1: I have seen this one before it’s the Lacie key USB. Pretty cool put it on your keys um again its shinny, fingerprints… but it does fit in with your keys so as a user device its pretty good.
MP3 4: MP3 players, that one it’s probably a bit big for just a MP3 player, probably an older model not too sure how old it is.
MP3 5: Good old shuffle (laugh) I need a screen yeah pretty much. MP3 6: Yeah I like the texture even though I didn’t touch it you can see
that it’s matt so you have things that out of your hands like most things do. Shape was interesting. Screen a little bit small assuming if its black and white.
MP3 3: New shuffle again. No screen. I suppose the good thing about the shuffle is that you don’t have to worry about dropping it because it’s going to be a lot more durable and it’s easy to run with. So probably one of the better things about it and its put of the way small.
MP3 2: Very interesting, I haven’t seen that before different shape, it’s not circular its oblong kind of blob. Shinny which again is probably is low on my radar. Pretty cool. Memorable.
MP3 1: Looks like a phone retro, I’m thinking star trek for some reason. Reminded me a lot of a phone.
202
Appendix F: Visceral Rhetoric Coding Application
203
204
Appendix G: Hedonic Coding Scheme Application
205
206
Appendix H: Visceral Rhetoric Hierarchy Example
207
Appendix I: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Relationship Coding Scheme Application
208
209
Appendix J: Visceral Hedonic Rhetoric Design Tool Storyboard Scenario
Work Through WheelDesign Notes
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
Design Brief Initial Concept
Attribute + RelationshipConsult Wheel
Re-design from Notes Final Concept
210
The End