A report on emotion in product design.

2. Executive summary
is report will convey and investigate the knowledge regarding how emotions
are related to products. It will communicate emotional; understanding, user
influence and application in the design process. e theory is then investigated
with a study of emotional responses to product appearance of a previously
design product. Finally a reflective summary will be made regarding the theory
to the application.
2.

3. 3.

6. Preface
is report was initiated during a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP)
involving De Montfort University (DMU), Filmlight ltd and the author, Luke
Woolfson. e KTP project was to integrate an industrial design capacity
within Filmlight. e intention was for Luke to design equipment to support
Filmlight’s software and therefore enhance Filmlight’s market position. e
Blackboard (fig. 1) and the Projector Probe (fig. 2) were both outcomes of this.
e KTP project ended in January 2007, since then Luke has continued to work
as an industrial designer at FilmLight, furthermore he was re-employed by
DMU as a part-time lecturer.
Filmlight creates high end equipment and software for the post production
industry. eir customers do not only want to use the products that fulfil their
visual aspirations, but ones that are on the bleeding edge of technology. e
industry has an inherent want for desirable products as the post production
workforce are focused on creating stunning imagery for their clients. Filmlight
addresses these wants by delivering equipment that matches, in terms of
quality, the films produced on them.
Emotions manifest themselves between user and product in this market. For
example the Northlight film scanner (fig. 3). Its product semantics convey
stability in its marble surface, accuracy in its movement and simplicity in its
controls. is promotes desire and inspiration in the user, as the product is an
outcome of their wants; as a machine that will not damage their valuable film,
will work consistency and is simple to operate. When the product matches the
user’s goals the user is then satisfied, not only for the event of accomplishing
their goals but also at Filmlight for matching these aspirations.
6.

7. 7.

8. Figure 1: Baselight Blackboard
A control surface used to operate Baselight colour
grading software. e controls are arranged on an
arc to reduce stretching to reach. Keys are backlit as
users would operate the Blackboard in the dark. ree
axis trackballs in the centre of the panel permit fine
adjustment of the image. A tablet at the front is used
for drawing shapes to key images and operating the
user interface. Colour screens around the edge provide
key mappings for ‘soft keys’ and feedback values of
adjustment.
8.

10. Figure 2: Truelight Projector Probe
A colour measurement instrument used to
calibrate digital projectors. It has a tri-stimulus
sensor and a spectrometer to measure wide range
of luminance. With a laser target the user can see
what area of the screen they are measuring. It has
two apertures of measurement, a fan angle of 6° for
large measurements and a 2° aperture to adhere to
film standards. With a small display means it can be
operated as a standalone product or connected to a
computer for detailed analysis.
10.

12. Figure 3: Northlight
A film scanner used for digitising film. It scans each
frame individually using its pin registration to hold
the film. e image resolution of the frame is 8K
(7,680 x 4,320 pixels) produced by splitting the image
in to it RGB components. e dust on the film can be
digitally removed by scanning the frame in IR light
which only shows the dust on the frame. Its marble
bed provides a thermal stable surface and means every
Northlight is unique.
12.

14. Introduction
In consumer behaviour there is a degree of emotional response to objects
(Norman 2004). is is apparent in product purchase, operation and in
ownership. e author wanted to find out how emotions are brought about,
how they can affect the user and how this knowledge can be applied by the
designer in to new product development (NPD). is study is therefore relevant
to how products are designed today and in the future
As markets become flooded with products, consumers are overwhelmed with
choice. In an effort to maximise their market potential company’s have to
satisfy the user’s inner emotions to provide an increased likelihood of product
purchase. is fuels the current global economy and maintains capitalism
(Curtis 2002, Kurtgozu 2003). To oppose this, there is a desire to re-establish
and increase the consumer’s emotional attachment to a product. is is to
decrease the wasteful nature of today’s ‘throw away’ society (Whiteley 1993).
is in turn will ease the pressure on the world resources and give rise to
products that are more sustainable (Chapman 2005).
To be able to ‘design for emotion’ we need to understand how emotions
are brought about; why different people feel different emotions towards a
product, are there any factors which are applicable to us all, how are emotions
measured? We also need to know how emotions influence the behaviour of
the user; why are attractive things easier and more satisfying to use, what
makes the user more emotional attached to one product than another, why
do emotions cause the user to behave irrationally? Ultimately, we need to
understand how designers can input and apply this knowledge in the design
process; how can they understand the user’s concerns, what tools are available
to them, how can they instil emotional value in to their design? In addition it’s
relevant to investigate such theories in practice on one of Filmlight’s products.
As emotion is an important factor for Filmlight, as they sell high value pieces of
equipment.
14.

15. 15.

16. How are emotions
established and
measured?
To understand how consumers are influenced by emotions we must first
understand how they differ from other affective states and how they are
brought about. Affective states can be characterised by the conditions that
give rise to them. In this approach there are two defining factors; 1) whether
the state involves a relation between the person and the object or not, i.e.
intentional or non-intentional and 2) whether the state is acute or reference
is made to a more or less enduring disposition, i.e. acute versus dispositional
(Desmet 2002).
Intentional Non-intentional
Acute Emotions Moods
Diapositional Sentiments Emotional Traits
Table 1: Affective states (Frija 1994).
Emotions (as shown in table 1.) are defined as an acute and intentional
state. An intentional state involve a relationship between the person and the
stimulus, while a non-intentional state is not directed at a specific stimulus
but the “the world as a whole” (Frijda 1994). An acute state is one that is
limited in time which is opposed to a dispositional state which is a personality
characteristic. For example “I’m afraid of dogs” is a sentiment (our attitude)
while “I’m frighten by the dog” is an emotion (Desmet 2002). Emotions not
only differ to moods by there intention they also differ in terms of time and
a physiological effect. I.e. emotions elicit a sharp change with a physiological
change, while moods are longer and less intense (Carlson 1997).
Within emotions Forlizzi et al (2003) combines Dewey (1971) and Carlson’s
(1997) model’s where they identify two emotional responses: Emotional
statements and emotional experiences.
16.

17. 17.

18. An emotional statement can be seen as less representative view of the
environment and more dependent on information specified about the self, it is
impulsive, momentary and autonomous. An example of this would be a baby
crying – responding to a physiological need.
In contrast an emotional experience is less dependent on the self and more
representative of the environments stimulus, it is sustaining, controllable and
may reference prior experience. An example of this would be a veteran weeping
at a war memorial. To summarise emotional statements are instinctive or
visceral and emotional experiences are reflective (Norman 2004)
Forlizzi et al (2003 p30) refers to Dewey (1971) “...no single formal attribute
(such as material, shape or colour) can be attributed to causing a specific
emotional response. Only when the formal attributes of an object come
together to act as a medium for an emotion does an object become expressive”
i.e. the colour red is seen as danger and also as a symbol of luck.1
is leads to wanting to able to understand the reasoning for emotional
responses in greater detail (Forlizzi et al 2003). Due to this, it is relevant to
look further into models which explain emotional responses for products,
such as Desmet (2002) model for product appearance. It is also apparent
to appreciate the different levels of design, be they visceral, behavioural or
reflective, and this knowledge has been realised by Norman (2004). Once we
understand the structure and levels of emotions, how can we measure the
emotions elicited. ankfully Desmet has created such a tool, the ‘Product
Emotion Measurement Instrument’ (PrEmo).
1 In Chinese culture and Chinese symbolism, red is the colour of good luck and success,
and is used for decoration and wedding attire (during the traditional half of the
wedding ceremony, while the bridal attire in the modern half is usually white). Money
in Chinese societies is traditionally given in red. (Wikipedia 2007)
18.

19. Desmet’s model of emotions
for product appearance
Emotion
Appraisal
Concern Product
Figure 4: Desmet’s model of product emotions (Desmet 2002).
ere are three key variables to Desmet’s model (see fig. 4): product appraisal,
product concern and product focus. ese three variables, and their interplay,
determine if a stimulus elicits an emotion, and if so, which emotion is
experienced (Desmet 2002).
Product Appraisal
Appraisal is core to the product emotion model as “All emotions are preceded
and elicited by an appraisal” (Roseman & Smith 2001). An appraisal is a
judgement of the significance of a product for our concerns. It is a non-
intellectual in the sense that is automatic and unconscious (Desmet 2002).
What specific emotion is experienced depends on the appraisal type, of which
there are four.
Appealingness is the appraisal of our attitudes.
Motive compliance is the appraisal of our goals
Legitimacy is the appraisal of our standards
Novelty is the appraisal of our knowledge and expectations
19.

20. Product concern
Human concerns are ‘desired end-states’ and every emotion hides a concern.
According to Frida (1994), “concerns can be regarded as points of reference
in the appraisal process.” us the significance of a stimulus to our wellbeing
is determined by an appraised concern match or mismatch. ere are both
general concerns, that of respect, safety and love, and there are personal
concerns, such as getting to the office on time. Concerns relevant to products
are attitudes, goals and standards. Knowledge & expectations is not a concern
type but is relative to the appraisal of novelty (Desmet 2002).
Attitudes are our dispositional likes (or disliking) for certain objects
or attributes of objects; they are our tastes for things. Attitudes can be
manipulated by personal meaning due to the significant personal experience
they have with the product. For example “I like my ring because it was a gift
some someone special”. A product that matches an attitude will be appraised as
appealing; this will result in an emotion such as desire. A product that conflicts
with our attitudes will be appraised as unappealing; resulting in an emotion
such as disgust (Desmet 2002).
Goals are something we want to obtain; it is how we would like things to be.
Humans have various goals that relate to consumer products; we buy or own
products because we believe they can help us achieve something, or because
they fulfil a need. Goals are relevant for our personal well-being. For example
“I want to get a faster car”. A product that satisfies a goal will be appraised as
motive compliant; resulting in an emotion such as satisfaction. A product that
obstructs a goal will be appraised as non-compliant; resulting in an emotion
such as dissatisfaction (Desmet 2002).
Standards are our beliefs, norms or conventions of how we think things
should be. Whereas goals refer to the state of affairs we want to obtain,
standards are the state of affairs we believe ought to be. Standards are relevant
for the preservation of our social structures For Example “I believe that we
should respect our parents”. A product that meets our standards is legitimate;
resulting in an emotion such as admiration. A product that conflict with
our standards is illegitimate; resulting in an emotion such as contempt and
indignation (Desmet 2002).
20.

21. Knowledge and expectations are not a particular concern type but is our
reference to which we know is fact. It is developed throughout our life from our
experience and education. For example “I know the inside of a fridge is cold” A
product that obeys our knowledge or an expectation is appraised as un-novel;
resulting in an emotion such as boredom. A product that deviates from our
knowledge or an expectation is appraised as novel; resulting in an emotion such
as a pleasant surprise (Desmet 2002).
Product focus
Product can evoke emotions in various ways, and it is not only the product per
se but the meaning that is interpreted from the product. I.e. the product can
act as a proxy. As we focus our attention to different aspects of the product,
in turn each aspect can induce a different emotion. According to Ortony
(1988) there are three aspects which we can focus: events, agents and objects.
Although a product is an object it is worth noting events and agents are no less
important (Desmet 2002).
Events are the focus on anticipated or past consequences of using or owning
the product. An example of an anticipated consequence is “A Ferrari will
increase my social status”. Each time we see a product we anticipate what goals
it may enable us to achieve. ese anticipations, however, can be created or
enhance by advertisements. An example of a past consequence is “Seeing a
skateboard reminds me of the fun times when I was young”. Here the product
is a symbolic meaning of past event. Also note that these may be personal or
based in society (Desmet 2002).
Agents are the focus of what the product represents. ese may be the
product; designer, company, impacts or a user group. ese again can be shaped
by personal experiences or can be based in society. An agent focus is linked to
our standards and our expectations. An example of an agent focus is this: “I
dislike mobiles that are loud, as I believe people should be discreet in public”
(Desmet 2002).
Objects are the focus of the product its self, its visual semantics or
technological qualities, and it can be linked to all concerns. An example of
an object focus is “I desire an iPod as I like simple forms”, which is based
on an attitude of form. Not only can the product be a focus but associated
21.

22. products can elicit emotions. Such as, a key chain can be associated with a car
model. is differs to agents as the focus is on the associated object not the
representation (Desmet 2002).
Emotions elicited
Emotions towards a product are not a special type of emotions. e
disappointment you elicit towards a product focus is that same as a human
focus. (Desmet 2002) Desmet’s model is created for the emotions experienced
for a pre-purchase context. It includes 14 emotions, 7 pleasant and 7
unpleasant. He doesn’t insist on these being the only emotions experienced but
they are the most common. Desmet refined 347 emotions down to 14 through
several studies. e aim was to realise a manageable set of emotions that where
distinct and relative to the context. e emotions also needed to be understood
across various cultures, due to the purpose of measurement.
Pleasant: Inspiration, desire, pleasant surprise, amusement, satisfaction,
admiration and fascination
Unpleasant: Boredom, disgust, unpleasant surprise, dissatisfaction,
disappointment, indignation and contempt
e main structure behind the emotions is based upon Russell’s (1980)
circumplex of emotions (fig. 5). Where there are two axes in the circumplex
which represent the dimension of ‘pleasantness’ (horizontal) and ‘activation’
(vertical). From Desmet’s studies of his measurement tool of an animated
character displaying a specific emotion, he discovered that people perceive
emotions as either pleasant or unpleasant. is enabled him to focus on the
single axis of ‘pleasantness’ for his model.
Examples
Different people experience different emotions to the same object, but the way
in which they experience emotions will be universal (Desmet 2002). e best
way to understand the model is to present some examples from real users. e
following examples are taken from one of Desmet’s study. In this study the
participants had to photograph a product that caused a specific emotion and
explain why the emotion was experienced. Desmet then determined the focus,
concern and appraisal using a systematic word rational approach. I.e. words
22.

23. Activation
Tense Excited
Upset Happy
Pleasure
Displeasure
Sad Contented
Lethargic Placid
Deactivation
Figure 5: Russell’s (1980) circumplex of emotions.
used by the participant such as should, ought to, tight, wrong, and justified
refer to a standard concern.
Example 1:
Product: Peugeot 406 coupe
Emotion: Desire
Participant’s comment: I think this car is very cool. I look at this car and wish
that I was like that; I guess I wish I were as cool as this car.
Focus: (Product as) agent; the products personality
Concern: Goal; I want to be cool
Appraisal: is car is as cool as I would like to be myself
Example 2:
Product: Lemon squeezer
Emotion: Dissatisfaction
Participant’s comment: is is a really nice squeezer. I am dissatisfied however
because it is probably very difficult to clean.
Focus: Event; the anticipated experience of using this squeezer
Concern: Accomplishment goal; I want a squeezer that is easy to clean
Appraisal: e difficulty to clean this squeezer is unacceptable
23.

24. Norman’s three levels of
design
Norman (2004) breaks down emotional responses into three levels of design
which are applicable to everyone. e three levels come from; within our
instincts, visceral, from use, behavioural, and from outside influence &
aspirations, reflective. As Norman (2004 p65) states “Each is as important as
the other, but each requires a different approach by the designer.”
24.

25. Figure 6: An example of visceral design, Met cycle helmet.
Visceral Design
At the visceral level it is evoking our inner instincts, our human drives; it’s at
a foundation level of product emotions. As Norman (2004 p67) states “e
principles underlying visceral design are wired in, consistent across people
and cultures.” When something triggers an emotion at a visceral level it’s has
an immediate unknowing impact to a person. An example would be when a
consumer takes one look at something and says “I want it”, before asking “what
does it do” and “how much does it cost?” At the visceral level, physical features
– look, feel and sounds dominate (Norman 2004). Product movement can also
been seen as a physical feature (Desmet 2005). Attractiveness is a visceral-
level phenomenon “…the response is entirely to the surface look of an object.”
(Norman 2004 p87)
e visceral level is similar to Jordan’s (2002) Physio-pleasure. “Which is the
pleasures of the body; sights, sounds, smell, taste, and touch.” (Norman 2004
p105) Physio-pleasures are a merge of the many aspects of the visceral level
with some of the behavioural level. (Norman 2004)
25.

26. Figure 7: An example of behavioural design, Wii steering wheel.
Behavioural Design
At the behavioural level it’s entirely about the use of the product, appearance
is less relevant. However the appearance in context of the use is a contributing
factor. As the product appearance can imply an expectation of how the product
should be operated, and what this will feel like. As Norman (2004 p70) states,
referring to the behavioural level, “What matters here are four components of
good behavioural design: function, understandability, usability, and physical
feel.”
e behavioural level is similar to Jordan’s (2002) Psycho-pleasure. “is deals
with people’s reactions and psychological states during the use of products.”
(Norman 2004 p105)
Norman (2004 p80) states “Designers of many computer based products are
restoring in th e natural, affective pleasures of the real, tangible world”. is
would be seen as designers trying to increase the behavioural response of the
software. See figure 7, which is a Wii steering wheel to control the computer
game Mario Kart.
26.

27. Figure 8: An example of reflective design, Alessi garlic-squeezer.
Reflective Design
At the reflective level it points to our culture and about the meaning of a
product or its use (Norman 2004). It’s how we see the product reflecting
our self-image and aspirations to others. is is due to products playing an
important roll in the statements they make to others. Additionally it can be in
relation to the personal meanings of products, our memories or associations.
“While attractive ness is a visceral level beauty comes from reflective level.”
(Norman 2004 p87). Which can be understood as:”Beauty is in the eye of the
beholder” (Hungerford 1878)
e reflective level is similar to Jordan’s (2002) Ideo-pleasure, which is where
one appreciates the aesthetics, or the quality, or perhaps the extent to which
a product enhances life and respects the environment. (Norman 2004) In
addition to this there are Jordan’s (2002) Socio-pleasures, which are derived
from interaction with others. Norman (2004 p105) states “many products play
an important social role, either by design or by accident.” is interaction can
be seen as a combination of both reflective and behavioural levels of emotional
response.
27.

28. Measuring Emotions (PrEmo)
How can we measure emotional responses to a product and why is it
important? If we understand why a set of emotions is elicited for a given
product then this knowledge would allow a designer to start a project with an
‘emotion strategy’ (Desmet 2002, p100). e ability to measure emotions in
this instance would allow the designer to emotionally profile a design concept
and compare it to their emotional strategy. us assisting the designer to reach
their goals and assess whether their design is appropriate. Desmet created
a tool, PrEmo (fig. 9), specifically for measuring the emotions elicited for a
product appearance. His objective was that the tool would be able to:
• Work in different cultures, i.e. be language independent
• Not require extensive equipment or technical expertise
• Measure product appearance emotions
• Measure mixed emotions
Figure 9: e PrEmo interface.
28.

29. PrEmo user interface (UI) is comprised of the previously mentioned 7 pleasant
& 7 unpleasant emotions with a small picture of the product to be assessed.
Each of the 14 emotions is communicated through an animated character.
When the participant selects one of the emotions the character displays the
emotion through facial expressions, bodily movements and a characterised
sound. e participant then rates the emotion on the three point scale. e
scale represents the follow ratings
I do not feel the emotion expressed (lower part of the scale)
I somehow feel the emotion expressed (middle part of the scale)
I do feel the emotion expressed (upper part of the scale)
e rating the character is expressed as the background of the emotion. e
participant can only move on to the next product once all the emotions have
been rated.
e facial expressions, movements and sounds produced help focus and
objectify emotions (Csikszentmihalyi 1993). is bridges cultural differences,
reduces misinterpretation and lowers the need for the participant’s emotional
knowledge. e participant might not be familiar with certain names of
emotions but they will be able to relate to these expressive cartoons.
29.

30. Summary
From Desmet’s model we can attain that product emotions are; 1) Personal; as
our concerns are personal thus our appraisals differ, hence so do our emotions.
2) Temporal; as in time our attitudes, goals, standards and our focus on
products change. 3) Mixed; they can be construed as relevant for more than
one concern (Desmet 2002). Overall Desmet (2002 p122) states “Different
people experience different emotions towards a given product because people
differ, both in their concerns and in their product focus.” Desmet also explains
that the model was developed for one type of interaction and that other type’s
interactions of appraisals might exist. Additionally our concern types are
intertwined as “Our standards influence our goals and out goal influence our
expectations.” (Desmet 2002 p123)
Every product will cause an emotional response on each of Norman’s (2004)
three levels, visceral, behavioural and reflective. e levels could be seen as
time relative, with visceral reactions happening in a products first encounter,
behavioural, after a period of product use, and reflective, after it has been
used in an event. However it’s not this independent, as again the levels are
intertwined. e reflective level, due to our product aspirations, will affect our
response on a first encounter
e PrEmo tool provides designers and researchers with a tool to emotional
map a design. is can be used to test the product to establish if the design
responds as intended. is as Lundahl (2006 p28) states referring to emotive
measurements, “ey have the potential to change the product development
paradigm, refocusing development away from product features to product
experiences, from liking drivers to emotive levers, and from optimization to
harmonisation.”
30.

31. 31.

32. How do emotions
influence the user?
“Emotion, and its positive or negative influence, shapes how we relate ourselves
to the real or imagined state of the world.” (Forlizzi et al 2003 p31) Emotions
are enduring; they impact on our thoughts and actions consistently without
in many situations us being aware of them. “Any emotion, if it is sincere, is
involuntary.” (Mark Twain 1835-1910). is influence in relation to products is
evident in product; purchase; why people desire something, use; why attractive
things work better and attachment; how personalisation affects or emotions
towards the object.
32.

33. 33.

34. e X-factor: “I want it and I
don’t know why?”
Desire in its various forms is a strong driving factor for a consumer want.
Frijda (1986 p283) states the essence of desire is the “…readiness to approach
or bring about situations of satisfaction”. According to Desmet (2002) desire
can be brought about in three different ways; desire of consequence, desire of
presence and the desire of identity. is can be attributed to the three central
appraisal types of motive compliance, appealingness and legitimacy.
Desire of consequence is the focus on the anticipated event of using the
product which may fulfil a goal, and is the appraisal of motive compliance. For
example “e thought of playing with the kangaroo ball3 makes me desire to
have fun” (Desmet 2002 p153)
Desire of presence is the focus of the object it’s self, this matches an attitude of
aesthetics, and is the appraisal of appealingness. is can come from inherently
pleasant stimuli such as bright colours and sweet tastes; as this is to appeal to
our senses. For example “I desire the vase for its sensual form” (Desmet 2002
p153)
Desire of identity is the focus of the products agent (the products personality)
which matches a self ideal standard or a goal, and is the appraisal of legitimacy.
is is seen as a ‘social desire’ through a personal identification with the
product. Desmet (2002 p154) states “we can ‘resonate’ with products as if they
were somehow people.” For example “is jeep is as relaxed I would like to be
myself. (Desmet 2002)
When all three of these desire types are exerted, the ‘buy now’ or ‘X-factor’
influence is brought about. is is due to as Desmet states (2002 p186) “…the
product resonates with what we want to be or become, want to experience or
own, and want to achieve or obtain.”
is power of desire is overwhelming and has changed society, from a need to a
want basis. is change dates back to the 20’s after World War One. By Edward
Bernays4 who first originated the notion; that not to sell a product on its
function, but to sell it on the feelings it would evoke, i.e. you will feel better if
34.

35. you own this car. is is in essence the first idea of emotionally connecting the
consumer to a product or service. (Curtis 2002)
An example of how Bernays made people desire something, and thus behave
irrationally, was by changing women’s view of the day that if they smoked,
which was a taboo at the time, they would be powerful & independent. is
was instigated with the phase ‘Torches of freedom’ being placed in papers after
Bernays made the first PR stunt. Curtis states:
“It made him (Bernays) realise It’s possible to persuade people to behave
irrationally if you link products to their emotional desires or feelings. e idea
that smoking actually made women freer was completely irrational, but it made
them feel more independent. It meant that irrelevant objects could become
powerful emotional symbols of how you wanted to be seen by others.”
Curtis, A. Happiness Machines: Part 1, e century of the self, (2002).
[time 13:50]
At this time corporations were worried about market saturation worries and
wanted to maintain their high production rates, which had been increased
during the war. Bernays techniques interested American corporations who
realised they needed to change the way customers thought about products
(Curtis 2002). An example of this instigation can be found in the following
quote:
“We must shift America from a needs, to a desires culture. People must be
trained to desire, to want to want new things even before the old had been
entirely consumed. We must shape a new mentality in America, mans desires
must over shadow his needs”
Paul Mazer – American Banker
Curtis, A. Happiness Machines: Part 1, e century of the self, (2002).
[time 16:45]
35.

36. Why attractive things work
better.
A less powerful influence than desire but one which is interesting is the notion
that attractive things work better. Norman (2004 pp17-18) cites an example
of a study by Kurosu and Kashimura (1995) who investigated different ATM
(automatic teller machines) layouts and discovered that the attractive ones
work better. is study was also repeated by Traxtinsky (1997), who was
very pessimistic about this belief. His studies, carried out in Israel, produced
stronger evidence than the Japanese study. is was a conflicting cultural
paradigm, as it was assumed by Traztinsky (Norman 2004) that Israelis hold
function higher than attractiveness.
Norman’s explanation comes from the behavioural design level. Norman (2004
p77) states: “Negative emotions kick in when there is a lack of understanding,
when people feel frustrated and out of control – first uneasiness, then
irritation, and, if the lack of control and understanding persists, even anger.”
Compared to “When we are happy your thought process expand, becoming
more creative, more imaginative. i.e. attractive thing make you feel good.”
(Norman 2004 p19) If the user feels happy, from the appearance, they a more
likely “to find solutions to the problems they encounter” (Norman 2004 p19),
and so they ‘appear’ to work better.
36.

37. Personalisation
Personalisation can be seen as a route to increase an emotional attachment
with a product. Mugge et al (2004 p10) states “Personalisation of a product’s
appearance positively affects the formation of an emotional bond with this
product.” In turn this helps lengthen a products relationship with their owner,
as “Emotional attachment to products can encourage people not to discard
a product” (Desmet 2002 p187). For a product to become personalised it
must have the owners energy invested into the process of personalisation, as
“Product attachment is related to the psychic energy invested in the product”
(Mugge et al 2004 p4)
‘Psychic energy’ can be viewed as a function of time, thought and activity. e
more of it we put in, the more we will be emotional attached to the product
through personalisation. Creative capacity, time and need can be limitations
to the lack of personalisation for many of our products. However there is one
product which will personalised by everyone that is our homes. Norman (2004
p220) states “Personalisation appears the greatest in our own homes, once an
empty shell becomes personalised to our own needs.”
e personalisation of the home is inevitable, we spend a considerable time
using our homes; sleeping, eating and socialising in them, we realise the
most basic creative ability; through the choice of colour, furniture and object
positions, and it has the greatest need to do so, as when we move in they are
normally an empty shell, a blank canvas upon which we paint our self-image.
It is in no surprise that ethnographers look to our home first to ‘immerse’
themselves in our self-image. Norman (2004 p224) quotes Harrison and
Dourish (1996) “A space can only be made into a place by its occupants. e
best that the designer can do is put the tools into their hands”
Manufactures have attempted to tap in to this emotional bond by offering
customisation options such a the Nike iD product. However, this is inferior
to personalisation due to low levels of psychic energy (Mugge et al 2004).
To take this to a deeper level Slater (1997 p63) states “Goods manufactured
cannot satisfy the users deeply embedded human needs because these good as
manufactured and calculated in relation to profit rather than arising organically
from authentic individual and communal life”
37.

38. How can designers
apply this knowledge?
To make use of the previous knowledge in a design project, it is apparent that
a suitable process must be used. As discussed, every group of users/customers
will experience different emotions to a product due to their appraisal method
(Desmet 2002). To understand the concerns and focus of the user, designers
must increase their user understanding; this methodology is known as user-
centred design. McDonagh-Philp (1998, p32) states “User-centred design
is a design methodology that utilizes users as a designing resource to increase
understanding of the user.” rough this increased understanding of the
concerns and focuses “...e better they (designers) will be able to influence the
emotional responses towards that design.” (Desmet 2002, p124)
Such a methodology needs to be intrinsic to the development process
(McDonagh-Philp and Lebbon 2000). Furthermore Norman (2004, p83)
states “Good behavioural design has to be fundamental part of the design
process from the very start; it cannot be adopted once the product has been
completed.”
Designers need tools to help them understand emotional structure and
measure emotional responses. Desmet’s [Product and Emotional] navigator
can help designers understand the eliciting conditions of emotions through
a database of examples. PrEmo, as previously mentioned, can be used by
designers to extract the emotional composition of a product. As Desmet
(2002, p183) states “is is an important feature of PrEmo as it can objectify
emotional responses and make these responses tangible”
User-centred methodology and a product emotion toolset helps designer’s
move towards an aspiration to add emotional value to a product. It is
mentioned that designers can only go so far with this goal, as: “Designers
cannot craft an experience, but only the conditions or levers that might create
an intended experience” (Forlizzi and Ford, 2000).
38.

39. 39.

40. User-centred design
ere is a need for this methodology as; “Designers lack a shared understanding
of emotion within the context of design, and information on how to think
about emotion during a new product conception” (Forlizzi et al 2003 p28).
In addition; “Products do not exist to merely perform tasks, they satisfy
other functional requirements. ese include aspirations, cultural, social and
emotional needs.” (McDonagh-Philp and Lebbon 2000, p33) To this end,
designers will not have knowledge and understanding of many different users
across a global spectrum. So they need to employ the methodology of user-
centred design to; “…fill their knowledge gap.” (McDonagh-Philp and Lebbon
2000, p33)
If designer chooses such a methodology it will; “Increase the odds that new
products will achieve success through delivery of compelling differentiated
experiences.” (Lundahl 2006, p32). ose who do not use such a methodology
run the danger of creating “poor designs.” (Norman 2004, p74) is is due to
basing their decisions on assumptions or a poor level of user insight (Crossley
2003). As Norman states “Designers as experts are not typical users, but often
think of themselves in that way.” (Norman, 1988, p151)
Norman (2006) asserts an interesting view, that if companies want success,
and ‘guaranteed good design,’ then they need to approach the design in a
structured iterative way. But if a company wants to achieve great design they
need ‘someone with a vision’ to guide the process towards their goal. It’s the
difference between ‘good improvements’ and ‘conceptual breakthroughs’. is
is re-affirmed by Cain (1998) “You can either be; a genius, be lucky, or have a
structured approach.” As we can’t instruct on how to be a genius we need to
explore an option of a structured approach. Crossley (2003) describes such an
approach used within PDD2 in his paper ‘Building Emotions in Designs’
2 PDD is a product design consultancy in London.
40.

41. PDD approach
Crossly (2003) breaks PDD’s approach in to a route of 5 overlapping stages,
which are: Immersing, storytelling, observing, creating and communicating.
From these stages designers can gain an insight into the user’s attitudes,
aspirations and values. ey can then create a character model, similar to
personas used in Human computer interface (HCI) design . is method of
understanding how the user acts enables the designer to provide users with
what they need. is is preferred to asking users directly what they want, as
they are unaware of such a design problem existing. In his view “Design is
now less about creating artefacts and more about creating and staging a new
compelling story for people to experience.” (Crossly 2003 p35)
Immersing
Designers need to immerse themselves into the user’s lives. ey need to look
into their environments. As Crossly (2003 p38) states “e environments that
people craft around themselves are rich within formation about personalities,
values and lifestyles.” Norman (2004, p225) agrees as he states “Our
possessions reflect our personalities.” e benefits of this stage is that the
designers can gain “clues regarding anticipated behaviours” and these “initial
impressions gained are often extremely accurate.” (Crossly 2003 p38)
Storytelling
e user needs to tell designers of their experiences through stories so that
designers can “…enter into a dialogue with their meaning system.”(Crossly
2003 p39) To design a relationship with a product “…we need to understand
fully people’s relationships with objects, other people, environments and so
on.” (Crossly 2003 p39). is can be seen as attempting to attain the reflective
level of a design, as it goes beyond function. e benefits of this stage are that
the designer is more likely to reach an increased level of reflective design.
41.

42. Observing
e observing stage is to watch them in action using products. is is to find
“…what they do, what frustrates them and what gives them satisfaction.”
(Crossly 2003 p40) Designers should be concerned that their presence may
affect the situation, and they should remain distant if possible (Robson 1993).
e benefit of this stage is that the design will gain understanding of how they
use products and will be able to enhance the behavioural level of design.
Creating
Here, designers need to “…focus on defining the essence of the problem and
creating relevant ideas.” Such ideas would be in visual methods that both the
designer and people can understand. A suitable way would be through iterative
“Protocepts”, a conceptual rough prototype, which allows to “…gauge emotive
response behaviours” (Lundahl, 2006, p32). Norman also states that “is
iterative design process is the heart of effective, user-centred design.” e
benefit of this stage is that the designer has applied the knowledge from the
previous steps to something suitably relevant to matching the user’s desires.
Communicating
To communicate the user understanding it’s suitable to present the findings in
a visual manner. In turn as the designer has immersed into the users space the
findings gathered should also be presented as an “immersive space” for others
to take in. One method Crossley suggests is to use a promotional video this
can; “…capture the desired experience, and bring visions to life enabling them
to communicate complex ideas and feelings in a more effective way.” e benefit
of this stage is to make sure that the empathy is understood by all.
42.

43. Tools
A suitable tool to use at the insight stage is Desmet’s [Product & Emotion]
Navigator (fig. 10). Using this tool the designer can gain understanding and
inspiration. It is a database of product and emotion case studies which the user
can filter. is allows the user to investigate, through examples, the eliciting
conditions for all the 14 emotions.
Figure 10: Screen shot of the [Product & Emotion] Navigator.
Selecting a case study explains the reason for the emotion elecited through
Desmet’s’ model of focus, concept and appraisal. is makes it very easy to
comprehend for the designer and thus increases their understanding.
Desmet (2002, p182) states “e [p&e] navigator’s main strength is that it
supports designers in manipulating the emotional impact of their designs,
while not conflicting with the designers’ personal visions on, and ideas about,
product emotions.” In essence it can be seen as a reference book of emotions
for designers. However, it does not show mixed emotions for a specific
product, but does show various emotions that might exist for a similar groups
of products. Overall it is seen as a beneficial tool to use. Lundahl (2006, p28)
states “…product developers need better measures that deepen insights into
how products as a whole elicit compelling, differentiated product experiences”
43.

44. Emotional value
e end intent to the user-centred design process is to build in emotional value
to the product. Norman (2004, p87) states “I learned that produces can be
more than the sum of the functions they perform. eir real value can be in the
fulfilment of people’s emotional needs, and one of the most important needs of
all is to establish one’s self-image and one’s place in the world.”
is is evident in many, if not all, of today’s advertising and branding. Such
campaigns attempt to create the emotional context of the product through
its experience. is however, leads to a limited attachment. One reason is
due the ‘problem of comparison’. For example (Easton 2007) referring to a
Ferrari: “e first time you sit in the leather seats and hear the engine roar
there is quite a rush of pleasure. But the 2nd, 3rd or 100th time it’s not the same.
We adapt to what we have got. And start to think what would really make life
complete is a lire jet.”
is short lived attachment to a product keeps capitalists content, as it means
that consumers will always want to buy the ‘next new thing.’ Consumers will
discard the object they bought, which they once desired so much, and move
to the new desired object. is comes with a element of danger for emotional
understanding as Kurtzu (2003 p57) states “Design and emotion runs the risk
of becoming a fashionable style, a catchword employed by advertising for the
marketing of luxury products to an elite culture”
So how could designers hope to maintain this emotional value? Norman (2004
p67) points towards the visceral level, as he states: “If you design according
to this rules (of visceral design) 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.” As previously
mentioned, engaging the user in personalisation of their product will bring
about an emotional bond that will be far stronger than the desires of the
reflective level.
44.

45. 45.

46. Study
To test the theory in practice it is appropriate to perform a study on products
relative to the author and Filmlight. e product choice was between; the
‘Blackboard’ (fig. 1), a control surface for colour grading3, released in 2005,
or the ‘Projector Probe’ (fig. 2), a measurement instrument for calibrating
projectors, released in 2007. Due to the Blackboard being on the market for
longer than the Projector Probe and having direct competitors to measure
against, the Blackboard was selected as an appropriate design to emotionally
map.
3 Colour grading is the process of altering and enhancing the colour of a motion picture
or television image, either electronically, photo-chemically or digitally. (Wikipedia
2007)
46.

47. 47.

48. Method
A questionnaire was e-mailed to a group of participants which consisted of the
previously mentioned 14 emotions each with an image of a product to rate (see
fig. 11 for images used). e participant was asked to rate each of the emotions
0, 1 or 2 against the product. ese ratings referred to the following:
0 – I do not feel this emotion
1 – I feel some of this emotion
2 – I do feel this emotion
e participants were asked to rate all of the emotions, to be impartial, not
to dwell on their response and to leave a comment for each of the products.
e following 5 colour grading control surfaces were tested: Da Vinci 2K plus,
Filmlight Blackboard, Pandora Poggle, Quantel Pablo, Tangent CP300.
e participants included people from both the film industry and as well as
people with no product knowledge. is enabled the opportunity to compare
the two sets of results and to analyse any differences.
48.

49. Figure 11: e 5 product images used for the study.
49.

50. Results
To analyse the results the following chart (fig. 12) was produced plotting the
5 products against the mean value of the 14 emotions. In addition to this, a
table of the differences between mean product ratings on the 14 emotions was
produced. is illustrated the significant differences between the products to
enable the products to be categorised.
Emotional Ratings: A B C D E
Disgust
Desire
Fascination
Satisfaction
Pleasant surprise
Inspiration
Contempt
Boredom
Indignation
Disappointment
Dissatisfaction
Unpleasant surprise
Admiration
Amusement
Figure 12: Emotional ratings of the products.
50.

51. Discussion
Overall the results produced some interesting findings, such as; the high value
of fascination towards the products, the lack of unpleasant emotional feelings,
the overall low level of emotional feeling, the differences between industry and
non industry responses and the groupings of two pairs of products. Generally
the study was a success due to the ability to demonstrate the theories in
practice and to discover insight into the products tested.
Emotions Elicited
e highest mean value for all products was fascination. is constant is
apparent due to the conditions of fascination, which are:
Eliciting conditions of fascination (Desmet 2002, p153)
Product focus: Unspecified (object, agent or event)
Concern: Need – the need of curiosity (either through exploration or
understanding)
Appraisal: My attention is caught by (some question about) the product (or: the
product is worth the investigation)
is concern of need of curiosity though understanding reflects a “desire to
acquire knowledge in the deeper sense of constructing elaborated, intellectually
satisfying representatives of the personally meaning phenomena.” (Ford 1992,
p90). is is revealed in the comments from the participants as “What are
they?” and “How does it work?” e concern of need of exploration differs to
the need of understanding as here participants are perusing the need to explore,
which requires the relatively superficial process of observation and discovery
(Desmet 2002, p151). Revealed in the participants comments as “I want to play
with and use the trackballs” and “It looks intriguing and inviting to use.”
ere is a general slant towards pleasant emotions. is is shown in the overall
mean of the pleasant emotions, 0.71, against the unpleasant emotions, 0.22.
None of the products produced a distinct unpleasant emotion across the
participants. is could be due to lack of aesthetic appreciation of a product of
this nature, and they were seen as looking very similar by the participants. You
would expect the participants to be more responsive with subject matter such
as cars or clothing, which have increased familiarity.
51.

52. In the comments there was a group of users who focused on the associated
object of the product, which they had owned or used in the past. is was then
used this as the basis of their appraisal. Comments such as: “...reminds me of
a BBC computer”, “looks similar to equipment I own.” and “It looks Amstrad
like”. is increases their interest in the product and amplifies their emotional
responses.
Other participants focused in the anticipated event, of them or a
knowledgeable user operating the product. is assisted them in objectifying
their responses considering if the buttons are too close, if it’s difficult to use
the keyboard or where they would rest their hands.
Industry vs. Public
Comparing industry and public responses (as shown in Fig. 13) it is apparent
there are some significant differences. is is made clear in table 2 which shows
that disappointment and dissatisfaction are noticeably higher for the industry
participants.
Emotional Ratings: Industry Public
Disgust
Desire
Fascination
Satisfaction
Pleasant surprise
Inspiration
Contempt
Boredom
Indignation
Disappointment
Dissatisfaction
Unpleasant surprise
Admiration
Amusement
Figure 13: Combined ratings for participants in industry and the public
52.

53. Emotion
Desire -0.01
Fascination -0.25
Admiration -0.07
Satisfaction 0.23
Pleasant surprise 0.23
Inspiration 0.10
Amusement 0.28
Contempt 0.01
Boredom 0.10
Disgust 0.19
Indignation 0.11
0.54
Disappointment
0.33
Dissatisfaction
Unpleasant surprise 0.29
Table 2: Difference between mean emotional ratings of industry and public.
is is apparent due to the conditions of the two emotions, which are:
Eliciting conditions of disappointment (Desmet 2002, pg143)
Product focus: Agent – the action of the agent responsible for the product
Concern: Interest goal
Appraisal: I regret that the product was not designed to match my interest as
much as I anticipated.
e industry group has an interest goal relevant to the products while the
non-industry group do not. An industry participant commenting on product D
“Looks well built, and could be handy that the three portions are separate for
moving them about, but doesn’t look like there is anywhere to rest your hands
though.”
is participant had an interest goal that he wanted the product to be
ergonomic. is caused disappointment when they anticipated it would be
ergonomic to use, as he can move the panels around, yet this was met by a
mismatch when they realised there was no where to rest their hands. e
participant is disappointed that the designer of the product didn’t match their
interest goal.
53.

54. Eliciting conditions of dissatisfaction (Desmet 2002, pg145)
Product focus: Event – the anticipated experience or consequence of using the
product
Concern: Accomplishment goal
Appraisal: is product’s inadequate goal fulfilment is unacceptable
Again the industry group has an accomplishment goal relevant to the products
while the non-industry group do not. An industry participant commenting
on product D: “Looks like a cheap toy. is would not impress any colourist or
client.” Compared to a non-industry participant commenting on product D:
“Looks clean and simple, a pleasure to use”
e industry participant wanted a product that would impress a client. e
participant is dissatisfied that a designer would produce such a product which
they know must impress the client. For the non-industry participant this goal
was not conceivable.
Fascination is the highest value for the industry participants too. is would
have been expected to be lower due to industry participants being more
aware of these products, which would reduce the need of understanding. But
there is also the need of exploration evident in the conditions of fascination,
as mentioned previously. Industry participants may be familiar with all the
products but they have yet to explore or use them all.
Industry participants had a higher emotional reaction to the products, with an
overall mean of mean 0.58 compared to 0.44. e industry participants also
correlated slightly more with a standard deviation of 0.24 compared to 0.32 of
non-industry participants.
Product & People Groupings
It’s evident in the results displayed in the figure 12 and the table 3 that there is
a correlation between certain products. e participant’s comments and ratings
also form into definable groupings.
54.

55. Emotion A-B A-C A-D A-E B-C B-D B-E C-D C-E D-E
-0.43 -0.61 0.39 0.57 0.57 0.75
Desire -0.04 0.14 -0.18 0.18
0.54 0.50 0.64 0.61 0.54 0.50
Fascination -0.11 0.00 0.11 -0.04
-0.32 0.46 0.61 0.39 0.54
Admiration -0.25 0.14 0.29 0.07 0.14
-0.50 -0.61 0.36 0.39 0.46
Satisfaction -0.21 -0.14 -0.11 0.29 0.07
-0.61 -0.61 0.50 0.61 0.50 0.61
Pleasant surprise -0.11 0.00 0.00 0.11
-0.43 -0.32 0.57 0.57 0.46 0.46
Inspiration 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.00
Amusement 0.21 0.18 -0.07 0.14 -0.04 0.29 -0.07 -0.25 -0.04 0.21
Contempt 0.07 0.00 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.14 -0.14 -0.07 -0.07 0.00
0.32 -0.32
Boredom 0.29 0.07 0.00 0.04 -0.21 -0.29 -0.25 -0.07
-0.32
Disgust 0.11 0.14 -0.04 -0.18 0.04 -0.14 -0.29 -0.18 0.14
Indignation 0.14 0.14 0.04 0.00 0.00 -0.11 -0.14 -0.11 -0.14 -0.04
0.32 -0.36 -0.54 -0.46
0.25 -0.04 -0.21 -0.07 -0.29 -0.18
Disappointment
0.32 -0.36
0.25 0.04 -0.04 -0.07 -0.29 -0.21 -0.29 -0.07
Dissatisfaction
-0.32
Unpleasant surprise 0.25 0.18 0.00 -0.07 -0.07 -0.25 -0.18 -0.25 -0.07
Table 3: Difference between the products 14 emotional ratings.
Product Grouping
Table 3 illustrates there are 3 groupings of products, A, BC and DE. is is
evident as both BC and DE have no significant differences between them.
A cannot be grouped with either set as it differs with all four of the other
product. But can be seen to sit closer to DE as it only differs on the fascination
emotion. is difference may be attributed to the picture used for product A as
it contains the image of the software UI which can heighten curiosity, as none
of the other products contain this.
Participants generally biased their emotions towards the pleasant or the
unpleasant emotions for a product, as 75% of response contained a total of 1 or
less in the opposing emotional group. I.e. if a participant gave a total of 6 in the
pleasant emotions and 1 in the unpleasant emotions it would be said that they
were biased towards the pleasant emotions.
Products A, D and E all have the smallest difference between their mean
of pleasant and unpleasant emotions, with a small bias towards pleasant
emotions (table 4). is illustrates that the participants either liked or disliked
products A, D and E. Compare this to products B and C which have a large
difference between pleasant and unpleasant emotions, strongly biased towards
pleasant emotions. is confirms the generally all the participants liked these
two products.
55.

56. Product Pleasant Unpleasant
A 0.62 0.31 0.31
0.95
B 1.05 0.10
0.84
C 0.94 0.10
D 0.57 0.28 0.29
E 0.47 0.36 0.11
Table 4: Mean pleasant and unpleasant emotions.
People Grouping
Figure 14 illustrates that we, in a basic way, can cluster the participants into
three groups; those with a low emotional response (N = 5), those with an
average emotional response (N=20) and those with a high emotional response
(N=4).
A noticeable correlation within the low emotional response group is a high
majority of women, 46% above the average compared to the other groups
which had 9% less (table 5). Additionally in this group there is correlation of
only rating fascination. Comments raised from this group feel nothing towards
the products as they are look very similar to them and they don’t know what
they are for. One participant comments: “ey (all) just look like black boxes
with buttons on them and I can’t tell what I’m looking at!”
Participant Response: Low Medium High
Sd Max
Mean
Sd Min
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Figure 14: Participant mean rating response.
56.

57. Percentage
Group Men Women of women
80%
Low 1 4
Medium 15 5 25%
High 3 1 25%
Table 5: Percentage of women in groups.
Improvements
is study could be improved upon in the followings ways.
e consistency between product images. Product A had a screen view in the
picture which leads to increased fascination. Product C had side views included
which strengthen its admiration. Product E is taken on a cluttered desk hence
the product appears cluttered. ere was also an inconsistent scale of the
pictures, which led certain participants to making ergonomic judgements of the
products.
e structure of the e-mail. e order of the products was the same for all
the participants, which might have increased product A‘s fascination. As the
participants had rate the emotions themselves, with no checking system in
place, a few participants missed of rating desire (0 was assumed in these cases).
Some participants also assumed that all the products were designed by the
author or they were older Filmlight products.
Participant’s emotional knowledge. As the participants rating their emotional
response against the emotion as word, rather than as an animated character
as found in the PrEmo tool, a few participants rated certain emotions
unexpectedly. For example, two participants both expressed their satisfaction
towards the product, in terms of their pleasant emotional a ratings and in
their comments. However they both rated contempt, which one can assume
they either don’t know what contempt means, they confused it with content
or they didn’t express the reasons for this emotion in their comments. Other
participants expressed negative thoughts in their comments and expressed
positive ratings for pleasant emotions.
57.

58. Reflective Summary
Noticeably, from the previous sections the multi faceted relationship between
‘design and emotion’ manifests itself within us all. For designers it is important
that they have the ability to know how to bring about a product experience.
e frequency of the papers referenced to ‘design and emotion’ suggests that
the subject is a phase of interest to academics, when in fact it’s been around
since the early 20th century. Designers can use their knowledge of ‘design and
emotion’ in a positive way, instead of focusing on breeding luxury desires.
Designers approach
Designers, ethnographers4 and usability experts are overlapping each other
instead of working in a linear approach. In this method designers have to invest
more time and effort in building understanding about their users to realise a
design which is suitable. For some designers this might seem uncomfortable
to understand the user fully before a concept stage, as they need to hold back
their desire to start designing, relying on their assumptions. Overall the tools
available can help designers reach this understanding and in turn they can help
confirm to there superiors why their design is suitable, using the PrEmo tool to
bring hard facts to an emotional concept.
Normans view (2006) regarding product greatness vs. a successful product
is interesting. is may be the reason for bad products. If the team designs
for greatness based upon a misguided vision it will lead to failure. us,
the element of risk is apparent when you aspire to create a conceptual
breakthrough; this is not surprising, as many of these products have failed. e
best solution would be for the visionary to study relevant topics to ‘design and
emotion’, so that they can make better valued judgments. Overall lowering the
risk of a product failing.
4 Ethnography presents the results of a holistic research method founded on the idea
that a system’s properties cannot necessarily be accurately understood independently
of each other. (Wikipedia 2007)
58.

59. 59.

60. Design movement
Kurtgozu (2003) touches on an important point that design thinking and
movements follow economic ontology and cultural paradigms. He also points
towards factors which are instigated under the start of a new movement. He
states “Emergence of every new design movement closely resembles a rush of
blood to the head, with very strong ideas based upon as yet articulated cultural
assumptions. Each birth is premature in the sense that its raison d’etre is not
yet understood and formulated even by its parents.” (Kurtgozu 2003 p53)
is correlation between economic ontology and the design movement is
not only interesting to provide reasoning behind previous movements. It
also comes with message of caution towards ‘design and emotion’ compared
to other papers. As he states “If it is to contribute towards a meaningful
relationship between people and things at all, ‘design and emotion’ should
resist this process by which emotions are turned into commodities.” His paper
also raises the question, what will be the next design movement? Furthermore
it suggests that designers should increase their knowledge of economics and
consumer moods. is understanding consumer mood can be seen to be
implemented by the film industry in the movies that are shown.
Future of ‘design and emotion’
What lies ahead for ‘design and emotion’? From a succession of subsequent
papers there seems to be a convergence of theories, as one influences the other.
e simplification of an emotional framework will be good thing for designers,
avoiding confusion and allowing them to work in a consistent framework. In
turn, as Kurtgozu has shown the next design movement lies within the next
economic ontology. Perhaps this will be a sustainable movement as ‘green
products’ are becoming more relevant to our society, as the public catch on that
they can’t continue to fulfil only immediate desires and should consider things
on a long term impact.
Basing what we know from the heightened bond between the user and object,
this may provide an avenue for designers to express their knowledge and
skill set. e designer of the future can ensure their design will perform its
functions for a lifetime. However, they need to focus on the user maintaining
their product for a lifetime too.
60.

61. 61.

62. References
Cain J. (1998) ‘Experience-based design: Towards a science of Artful Busniess
Innovation.’ Design management Journal Fall. 10
Carlson, R. (1997). Experienced cognition. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum
Curtis, A. Happiness Machines: Part 1, e century of the self, (2002). [TV],
BBC2 17th March.
Chapman, J. (2005). Emotionally durable design: Objects, Experiences and
Empathy. London: Earthscan Publications
Crossley, L. (2003). Building Emotions in Design, PDD group, e Design
Journal, vol 6, iss 3, pp35-45
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993). Why we need things
Desmet, P. (2002). Designing Emotions. Netherlands: Delft University press
Desmet, P. (2003). A multilayered model of product emotions, e design
journal Vol 6 iss 2, pp4-13
Desmet, P., Weerdesteijn, J.M.W., and Gielen, M.A. (2005). Moving design: to
design emotion through movement, e design journal Vol 8 issue 1, pp28-39
Dewey, J. (1971). e theory of emotion.
Douglass, M.T. and Isherwood, B.C. (1979). e world of goods. New York: Basic
Books.
Easton, M. What makes you happy?: e happiness formula, (2007) [TV] BBC2
Ford, M.E. (1992). Motivating humans. London: Sage Publications
Forlizzi, J. and Ford, S. (2000). e building blocks of experience
Forlizzi, J., Disalvo, C., and Hanington, B. (2003) Emotion experience and the
design of new products, e design journal, vol 6, iss 2, pp29-37
Frijda, N.H. (1994). Varieties of affect: emotions and episodes, moods, and
sentiments.
Hungerford, M. (1878) Molly Bawn
Harrison, S. and Dourish, P. (1996). Re-Place-ing space: e role of place and
space in collaborative systems. ACM Proceedings of the Conference on Computer
Support of Collaborative Work (CSCW) New York: ACM
Jordan, P. (2002). Designing pleasurable products: An introduction to the new
human factors. London: Taylor & Francis
Kurosu, M. and Kashimura, K. (1995). Apparent usability vs. inherent usablity:
experimental analysis on the determinants of the apparent usability
Kurtgozu, A. (2003). From function to emotion: a critical essay on the history
of design arguments. e design journal, vol 6, iss 2, pp49-59
62.

63. Lundahl, D. (2006) A holistic approach to product development, Food
technology November, pp28-33
McDonagh-Philp, D., and Lebbon, C. (2000). e Emotional domain in
product design, e design journal vol 3 iss 1 pg 31-43
Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H. and Schoormans, J. (2004). Personalising product
appearance: e effect on product attachment, Delft university
Norman, D. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New
York: Basic Books.
Norman, D. (2006).A discussion with Don Norman on what makes great design
prt1: Icon-o-Cast by Lunar Design [Podcast] [http://phobos.apple.com/
WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=78230141&s=143444 19/08/
2006]
Robson, C. (1993). Real world research; A resource for social scientists and
practitioner researchers, Oxford
Roseman, I.J., and Smith, G.A. (2001). Appraisal theory: assumptions, varieties,
controversies.
Tractinsky, N. (1997). Aesthetics and apparent usability: Empirically assessing
cultural and methodological issues.
Whiteley, N. (1993). Design for society. London: Reaktion Books
[WWW] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red
[WWW] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_grading
[WWW] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
[WWW] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnographers
[WWW] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_hopper
[WWW] http://nikeid.nike.com
63.