Design methods for emotions

  • 525 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
525
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
2

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. State of the Art Design Methods for Emotions Design Methods DM934, DMEM, University of StrathclydeI declare that this submission is entirely my own original work. I declare that, except where fullyreference direct quotations have been included, no aspect of this submission has been copied fromany other source. I declare that all other works cited in this submission have been appropriatelyreferenced. I understand that any act of Academic Dishonesty such as plagiarism or collusion mayresult in the non-award of my degree.Signature: Claire Utrecht, Carles DebartDate: 11th of November of 2012 Carles Debart Claire Utrecht
  • 2. State of the art design methods for emotionsContents 1. Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 2. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 2.1 Definition of emotion………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 2.2 Introduction to Kansei Engineering………………………………………………………………….. 1 2.3 Additional Quantitative Methods......................................................................... 2 3. State of the Art Methods for Emotional Design …………………………………………………….. 3 3.1 Desirability testing………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 3.2 Experience sampling method (with feedback)…………………………………………………. 4 3.3 Generative research……………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 3.4 Collage method………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 3.5 Love and breakup letter…………………………………………………………………………………. 6 4. Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 5. Reference list………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
  • 3. State of the art design methods for emotions1. AbstractEmotional design, also referred to in literature as affective design, is a field of increasingsignificance due to consumer’s desire to own not only functional, but beautiful products. Afundamental dilemma exists though. How can one convert subjective statements intoquantifiable metrics? This paper will examine the traditional methods: Kansei Engineering,QFD, Voice of Consumer, and Conjoint Analysis, while also offering five state-of-the-artdevelopments in the field: desirability testing, experience sampling method (with feedback),generative research, collage method and the love and breakup letter. Finally, the methodswill be critiqued and evaluated.2. Introduction2.1 Definition of design for emotionsProduct functionality and reliability are no longer enough for today’s consumer products.Now, more emphasis is based on the aesthetic value of a product. Design for Emotion is afield that takes subjective responses about attractiveness of product attributes and convertsthem into quantifiable design parameters. This paper will discuss the historical methods,state-of-the art methods in the field, and will analyse the benefits and the pitfalls of each.2.2 Introduction to Kansei engineeringIn the 1970s, research was conducted in Japan regarding the introduction of emotionalvalues in products. The Kansei model, named after the Japanese translation of the Germanphilosopher, Immanuel Kant, is a reference to his 18th century work regarding sensitivity andsensibility, as reviewed by Schütte(2008). In both the East and the West, this work is avaluable component to Emotional design. A general world-wide adopted model can befound below. Kansei Engineering General Model proposed by Schütte(2005) 1
  • 4. State of the art design methods for emotionsThe Kansei method has six components: Choice of Domain, Span the Semantic Space, Spanthe Space of properties, Synthesis, Validation, and Model Building. The Choice of Domainrefers to the field or conditions in which the product will be used. Then, the traditionalKansei model utilizes two different inputs: Osgood’s Semantic method and Schütte’sdescription of product processes. Osgood’s Semantic method asks a respondent about thehow he/she feels about a topic, based on two dissimilar adjectives i.e. “rate this feature on ascale from one to five, one being meaningful, five being meaningless” Osgood(1975).Schütte’s description of product processes defines the scope of the analysis. For example, amarket niche or target age range Schütte(2005). The data returned from research is thensynthesised. The final stages are validation (if failure results, a feedback loop to semanticspace and space of properties is necessary) and model building which will result in a physicaloutput from the analysis.The Kansei model is powerful because it can be applied to both physical and intangibleproducts. It is a quantitative statistical model that aids in development by narrowing theoptions, until the desired result is achieved.2.3 Additional Quantitative MethodsSimilarly, Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Voice of Consumer (VoC), and ConjointAnalysis are additional methodologies that convert consumer’s implicit needs intoquantifiable metrics, as is supported by Lokman(2010). QFD ranks the consumer needs,holds the engineering metrics, compares the competitor performance, while balancingconflicts and showing relationships. VoC is generally used as an input to the QFD. Its role isto assess market research to prioritize consumer wants and needs into a hierarchy.Lokman(2010) suggests that conjoint analysis is a statistical method that enablescomparison of a feature set and how much consumers are willing to pay for them.The fundamental difference between the Kansei model and QFD, VoC, and CA is that theKansei model is the only one that provides analysis of one’s implicit needs. On view,expressed by Lokman(2010), QFD, VoC, and CA focus more on explicit needs.Unlike the Japanese, who began using the method in the 1970’s, as a top-down model forproduct development with the user experience at the center of product requirements, theapplication of the Kansei Method is a relatively new development in European firms. Toease the change in European product development a bottom-up application process is used,as reviewed by Schütte(2008). 2
  • 5. State of the art design methods for emotions3. State of the Art Methods for Emotional DesignThe following section provides five examples of state of the art methods that apply in thefield of emotional design. To simplify the analysis, the different phases of design have beengrouped in 4 stages: definition, research, concept generation and evaluation. Some of themethods are used for only one of the stage, while others can be used in several of them.Critical review and adoption by the industry is discussed as well.3.1 Desirability testingThe desirability testing method was invented by Microsoft and first analyzed by Benedekand Miner in 2002. Contrary to the majority of emotional design methods centered inresearch and evaluation, this method influences the design concept stage. The theorybehind this method is based on the human’s ability to set up first impressions andemotional attributes at a first glance, when a particular product is shown. Therefore, it is aneasy and non-intrusive method of emotion collecting based on the aesthetic component ofa product, in contrast of the traditional post-experience methods such as interviews, asproposed by Barnum(2010).In practice, to enable easier deployment and analysis of the method, a set of cards are used(commonly called product reaction cards) with phrases and words normally extracted froma previous market research, as it is described by Barnum(2010). Participants pick the cardsthat best match with the feelings and emotions that products or services have aroused onthem. With a simple statistical analysis, the five most used words are highlighted.Apart from Microsoft in the 2002, Yahoo used this method to evaluate different visualdesigns for its websites. More recent approaches have been developed and analysed byBarnum(2010). A new call-center application was analysed in terms of interface aestheticsand usability. It consisted in 56 cards with complete range from totally positive to totallynegative adjectives. 93% choices were positive and only 7% negative despite the fact that the interface was completely new and no further training was supplied to the users. This over-expected successful result at the new product evaluation stage (expressed a as acquiescence bias by Barnum(2010)) is an evident con of desirability testing method. It can have a detrimental impact on the final result in comparison with other post-experience methods, because of the enhanced emotional factor of first impressions. Keeping in mind that disadvantage, it is recognised by the industry as a good Results from desirability test applied to the launch of method to evaluate and understandcall center application. Comparison between thecurrent site and two options of design Barnum (2010) 3
  • 6. State of the art design methods for emotionsthe aesthetic properties of a product and its emotional qualities and used commonly todecide between two different branches of product design. As supported by Hawley(2010),the design team therefore, can use this method to sharpen and enhance the emotionalresponse they want to arouse in the user, in a further redesign stage.3.2 Experience sampling method (with feedback)Experience sampling method is one of the more widely used methods for its capacity toobtain information in the phases of research and definition. This method has its origins in1983 with Larson(1983), and came from the field of social and behavioural science.However, in 2008, further benefits were acquiesced and the model was updated to includefeedback to the user.The aim of this method is to acquire the psychological procedures of the user “in situ”, it isto say, trying to simulate the real life situation of the studied field, as argued by Forlizzi(2008). Its distinctiveness lies in the fact that the recollection of behaviours and emotions isdone by the participant himself. The user is prompted to record data either in setincrements of time or triggered by a signal, giving room to technological innovations such asmobile applications that facilitate the collection of information in the right moment bymeans of images, writings or voice, as suggested by Hanington, Martin (2012).This method is interesting because isolates the participant from any external output thatcould lead into a change in his normal way of doing things. However the traditional modelwas time consuming and required high commitment from the participants, which can drivein irritability, slackness and incoherencies. To solve these problems, an evolution ofexperience sampling method (ES+feedback) was carried out by Hsieh in 2008. In hisapproach, Hsieh(2008) found that feedback could give compliance, defined as the numberof completed responses divided by the total number of items questioned. Feedback wasdelivered by showing the collected data from the own user in order to make them feel thatinformation was more personal, relevant, and interesting. According to Hsieh(2008), withthis innovation in the traditional experience sampling method, a 23% increase in usercompliance was reported. Nevertheless, despite this welcomed increase, the study does notgive any solutions on how to improve the main problem of the experience samplingmethods; such as, humor changes and emotional disturbances caused by questionsinterrupting the participant.3.3 Generative researchGenerative research is a multipurpose method that can be used for the first three phases ofdesign (definition, research, concept design). The theory behind it is based on giving theparticipants the necessary tool kits to show emotions and sensations such as: text cards,drawing, clay, etc..., as reviewed by Sanders(2000). Acording to Hanington(2007) Generativeresearch can be divided in two subgroups: projective and constructive. 4
  • 7. State of the art design methods for emotions The projective methods are commonly used to let the participants freely express their emotions and feelings through plastic or clay toys. This model is especially useful in eliciting feedback from children, who are not able to express themselves with words. On the other hand, constructive methods are commonly used in laterProjective method: clay toys made by participants asked torepresent feelings. Negative feelings were translated into phases of concept development andstrange artefacts while good feelings were translated into make use of the “Velcro concept” orsymmetrical and recognizable shapes Hanington, Martin flexible modeling. This can be easily(2012). understood by referencing the case study performed by a cosmetic brand regarding their bottles. Participants were asked to show their preferences by means of a tool kit of translucent swatches and colored underlay sheets, as reviewed by Hanington(2007). Another example (left) retrieved by Hanington, Martin (2012) is a group of participants using a modeling kit to propose desired specs for a cell phone application. Constructive method: modelling kits to propose desired Generative research is focused to specs to a new phone application Hanington, Martin (2012) deeply understand user needs, emotions, and desires. It is usedfrom concept development through creative activities as shown on in the above pictures.However, one of the common problems found by the industry with the use of thesemethods is to supply the participants with toolkits that give a wide enough number ofelements in order to not to limit their creativity, but at the same time, give and establishenough constraints to extract useful results for the design.3.4 Collage methodThe collage method is a subtype of generative method. According to Sanders (2001) andagreed by Stappers(2003), collages bring extremely rich source of information because theparticipants can freely provide their vision, emotions, experiences and desires in a natural,straightforward and visual way. This method, therefore, is key to analyse the internalemotions of participants, taking into account that these are normally difficult to obtain fromother sources such as traditional polls or interviews. It is a method that significantly reducesthe possibility of obtaining biased information that occurs with the presence of aninterviewer. Hence, no emotional filter is expected during the realisation of the activity. 5
  • 8. State of the art design methods for emotionsBecause of this, one of the main challenges of the method is to retrieve the hiddeninformation from the collage. In fact, sometimes it can be extremely difficult and it is oftennecessary to undertake statistical methods like image and word concurrency or even moresophisticated analysis such as the multidimensional scaling, as stated by Stappers (2003).These later analysis has to take into account not only the content, but its shape and itemdistribution through the collage an even element interaction.Sanders(2001) suggests that one positive aspect of this method is that can be used togetherwith other methods to be able to analyse the design from different approaches such asmarketing, anthropology and participative design. The case study we are focusing on wascarried out in 2003 by the university of Delft and directed by Stappers. Three different variations of the main method (called central) were deployed: computer assisted, symbolic and mind map. The objective was to find out which of these variations could offer better performance depending on the number of created artefacts, the content, and time efficiency. The central method (which considers the typical words and pictures collage), found that the computerComputer assisted collage performed by Delft University assisted method was muchStappers(2003) quicker, but showed a lack of creativity and richness due to theintrinsic limitation of machines. The duration of the symbolic design was similar to thecentral, but information was better structured. On contrary, this variation showed a lack ofdeep information and anecdotes. Finally, the mind map required more effort from theparticipants, as they had to build the content from scratch.As a conclusion, and taking into consideration the high number of case studies found in theliterature, in can be asserted that collage is a currently used method by industry and relieson its major advantage: non intrusiveness.3.5 The love and breakup lettersThe most innovative example is the love letter and breakup letter. They are two methods tounderstand how a product influences in the state of mind of the participant. It is used to seehow people assess and what their expectations about a product are. In other words, thismethod wants to extract the emotional connection of the product-user couple. Love letterand breakup letter are opposite but complementary and their aim is to personify the object.The target is to build a person-person emotional connection rather than a person-productone. This is achieved by writing a letter to the product in order to remove the psychologicalaffective barriers of the person-product couple. 6
  • 9. State of the art design methods for emotionsHanington, Martin(2012) propose that in the love letter, user is encouraged to show deepfeelings and emotional connections during the usage of a certain product while the breakupletter emphasizes on bad emotional circumstances that made someone leave a productbehind.The method works better in groups and it is crucial to gather all the information ofexpression and nonverbal language during its reading, as suggested by Hanington,Martin(2012). Although not mentioned by the author, handwritten letters could begraphically analyzed to discard real feelings from over-acted feelings because of theemotional nature of the exercise.The method was developed in 2009 by Smart design and has represented a great success forthem. In fact, is being used in several projects that can which proves that is a truly state ofthe art method. Nevertheless, due to its newness and private company origin, it is still rareto find in the industry. It has not been possible to document any serious case study usingthis method outside of Smart Design premises.4. ConclusionsConclusions and critical review has been done in each of the presented methods. Due to thelarge number of characteristics and particularities, the authors have found convenient tobuild a table highlighting the most important specs and findings on previous analyzedmethods. Design phase # users type raw data emotion Inherent specs Method Complexity Concept generation Widely adopted State of the art Non-intrusive Small groups Quantitative Long (time) Qualitative Evaluation Big groups Simulated Definition Individual Research Artifacts Creative Speech Images Biased Text RealDesirability testingExperience sampling (fb)Generative researchCollage methodLove and breakup letter 7
  • 10. State of the art design methods for emotions5. Reference list 1. Barnum, C. & Palmer, L., (2010). More than a feeling: understanding the desirability factor in user experience. Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems 2011 proceeding, Vancouver, BC, Canada - May 07-12, 2011. 2. Hanington, B. & Martin, B. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers, 2012. 3. Hanington, B., (2007). Generative research in design education: Emerging Trends in Design Research (pp.1–15) 4. Hsieh, G. et al., (2008). Using visualizations to increase compliance in experience sampling. Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Ubiquitous computing - UbiComp ’08, p.164. 5. Larson, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1983). The experience sampling method. In H. Reis (Ed.). New Directions for Naturalistic Methods in the Behavioral Sciences (pp. 41-56). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 6. Lokman, AM. (2010). Design & Emotion: The Kansei Engineering Methodology. Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences Universiti of Technologi MARA (UiTM) Malaysia. 7. Osgood, CE., Suci, GJ., Tannenbaum, PH. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. 8. Sanders, N., Elizabeth, B., (2000). Genereative tools for CoDesigning. In proceedings of Codesigning 2000 (pp. 3-12) 9. Sanders, E. & William, C., (2001). Harnessing people’s creativity: Ideation and expression through visual communication. In Focus groups: Supporting effective product development. Langfor J and McDonagh-Philp D (Eds) Taylor and Francis,. 2001 10. Schütte, S. (2005). Engineering Emotional Values in Product Design: Kansei Engineering in Development. UniTryck, Linköping. 11. Schütte, S., Krus, P., & Eklund, J. (2008). Integration of Affective Engineering in Product Development Processes. European Conference of Kansei Engineering. Retrieved from http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/033/054/ecp0803354.pdf 12. Stappers, P. & Sanders, E., (2003). Generative tools for context mapping: tuning the tools. Design and Emotion journal. 8