Advertisement

Emotional Attributes of Urban Furniture

  • Gabriela Zubaran Pizzato
  • Lia Buarque de Macedo Guimarães
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)

Abstract

This article presents a research on emotions, which emerge from the interaction among user, urban furniture and its use setting. Three empirical studies aimed to: (i) identify and characterize emotional reactions (either positive or negative) raised from the interaction among users, urban furniture and public space; (ii) evaluate one positive emotion (pleasantness) and (iii) one negative emotion (fear) raised from the use of urban furniture/public space. Regardless of gender, the most mentioned positive emotion was pleasantness associated to safety. Fear was the main negative mentioned emotion, being a drawback in the use of public spaces. Attributes of eight constructs (users; activities performed in the public space; accessibility; privacy; urban furniture; vegetation; maintenance; buildings) were related to four space types (pleasant/safe; pleasant/unsafe; unpleasant/safe and pleasant/unsafe) resulting in basic elements to be used in guidelines for design and evaluation of emotional urban furniture/public space. Products with emotional appeal tend to be less vandalized, and to be more intensely used, therefore contributing to people’s well being and more livable cities.

Keywords

Emotional design Urban furniture Public space 

References

  1. 1.
    Plutchnik R (1980) Emotion: psychoevolutionary synthesis. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ekman P (1992) An argument for basic emotions. Cogn Emot 6(3–4):169–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Evans D (2001) Emotion: the science of sentiment. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nasar JL (1997) The evaluative image of the city. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scott NA (1992) Chief student affairs officers: stressors and strategies. J Coll Stud Dev 33(2):108–116Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diener E (1984) Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull 92(2):410–433Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Argyle M (1987) The psychology of happiness. Methuen, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Myers DG, Diener E (1995) Who is happy? Psychol Sci 6(1):10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Desmet P (2002) Designing emotions. Delft University of Technology, DelftGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jordan PW (2000) Designing pleasurable products: an introduction to the new human factors. Taylor and Francis, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norman D (2004) Emotional design: why do we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jordan PW (1998) Human factors for pleasure product use. Appl Ergon 28(1):25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krippendorff K, Butter R (1984) Product semantics: exploring the symbolic qualities of form. Innov J Ind Des Soc Am 3(2):4–9Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krippendorff K (1989) On the essential contexts of artifacts or on the proposition that “design Is making sense (of things). Des Issues 5(2):9–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacobs J (1992) Death and life of great American cities. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marcus CC, Francis C (1990) People places: design guidelines for urban open spaces. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Helander MG, Tham MP (2003) Hedonomic: affective human factors design. Ergonomics 46(13–14):1269–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khalid HM, Helander MG (2006) Customer emotional needs in product design. Concur Eng Res Appl 14(3):197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Desmet PMA (2012) Faces of product pleasure: 25 positive emotions in human-product interactions. Int J Des 6(2):1–29Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pizzato GZ, Guimarães LBdM (2014) Design and emotion in collective public use products? In: 9th International Conference on Design & Emotion Proceeding. Bogotá, Colômbia, pp 250–255Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lynch K (1990) The image of the city. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bauman Z (2009) Confiança e medo na cidade. Zahar, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Löbach B (2001) Design industrial: bases para a configuração dos produtos industriais. Edgard Blücher, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guimarães LBdM (2004) Funções do produto. In: Guimarães LBdM (ed.) Ergonomia de produto, vol 1. FEENGE, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pizzato, GZ, Guimarães LBdM, Caten C (2012) The perception of pleasantness in a product of collective use: the bus shelter. Work 41(Suppl 1):282–289Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pizzato GZ, Guimarães LBdM, Damo A (2012) The perception of fear when using urban furniture. Work 41(Suppl 1):266–271Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Morris E (2009) The fundamentals of product design. Bloomsbury, LausanneGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dazkir S, Read M (2012) Furniture forms and their influence on our emotional responses toward interior environments. Environ Behav 44(5):722–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Loukaitou-Sideris A (2005) Is it safe to walk here? In: Transportation research board conference proceedings. Research on women’s issues in transportation. Transportation Research Board Conference, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., vol 2, pp 102–112Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stamps AE (2000) Psychology and the aesthetics of the built environment. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Park SH, Kim JH, Choi YM, Seo HL (2013) Design elements to improve pleasantness, vitality, safety, and complexity of the pedestrian environment: evidence from a Korean neighborhood walking case study. Int J Urban Sci 17(1):142–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lang J (1994) Urban design: American experience. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gehl J (1987) Life between buildngs. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Despard E (2012) Cultivating security: plants urban landscape. Space Cult 15(2):151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    De Nisco A, Warnaby G (2014) Urban design and tenant variety influences on consumers’ emotions and approach behavior. J Bus Res 67(2):211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mehta V (2007) Lively streets: determining environmental characteristics to support social behavior. J Plan Educ Res 27(2):165–187MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kuo F, Sullivan W (2001) Environment and crime in the inner city: does vegetation reduce crime? Environ Behav 33(3):343–367Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kaplan S, Kaplan R (1989) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Russel JA, Snodgrass J (1987) Emotion and the environment. In: Stokols D, Altman I (eds) Handbook of environmental psychology, vol 1. Wiley, New York, pp 245–280Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Russel J (1988) Affective appraisals of environments. In: Nasar JL (ed) Environmental aesthetics: theory, research, and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 120–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Zubaran Pizzato
    • 1
  • Lia Buarque de Macedo Guimarães
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Design and Graphic ExpressionFederal University of Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil
  2. 2.Graduate Program in Industrial EngineeringFederal University of Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations