产品设计中的惊喜与幽默:多种形式的感官隐喻设计

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Geke D. S. Ludden, Barry M. Kudrowitz, H. Schifferstein, P. Hekkert
{"title":"产品设计中的惊喜与幽默:多种形式的感官隐喻设计","authors":"Geke D. S. Ludden, Barry M. Kudrowitz, H. Schifferstein, P. Hekkert","doi":"10.1515/HUMOR-2012-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visualtactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"45","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surprise and humor in product design: Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities\",\"authors\":\"Geke D. S. Ludden, Barry M. Kudrowitz, H. Schifferstein, P. Hekkert\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/HUMOR-2012-0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visualtactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"45\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR-2012-0015\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR-2012-0015","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 45

摘要

当来自两种或两种以上感官模式的信息发生冲突时,这可能会引起惊讶的反应,以及娱乐、兴趣、困惑或失望的感觉。与笑话理论一致,我们认为人们欣赏和享受与产品相关的适当的不协调,而他们对不适当的不协调感到困惑,并对不适当的不协调持负面看法。本文报道了橡胶鸭和除臭剂两类产品的设计和评价,其中包括视觉触觉、视觉嗅觉和视觉听觉三种适当的感官不协调。参与者评估惊讶程度和由此产生的情绪强度。他们还表明了他们对产品的总体喜欢程度。适当和不适当的不一致都被评估为令人惊讶和困惑。不出所料,适当的不协调引起了更多的乐趣,并且普遍受到青睐。尽管视觉不一致的产品在适当和不适当的不一致中显示出很大的喜欢和娱乐评级差异,但这些差异在视觉-听觉和视觉-嗅觉不一致的产品中较小。可能,当触觉和视觉之间的冲突带来的不协调的适当性比嗅觉或听觉所涉及的更明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surprise and humor in product design: Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities
When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visualtactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信