Symbiosis: Creativity with Affective Response

  • Ming-Luen Chang
  • Ji-Hyun Lee
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4562)

Abstract

The objective of this research is to present the symbiosis concept that integrates creativity and the recent research issues in affective response to products shapes. The major idea behind this study is systematically using affective response and design axiomatic in rational way through creativity approach that support on creativity stimulation for current highly competitive market. The practicality of the proposed methodology involved affective response measurable system that based on Semantic Differential (SD) method and interrelated computational regulation, creativity approach that based on Sensuous Association Method (SAM) and Creativity-Based Design Process (CBDP), and integrated mechanism using Axiomatic Design (AD) method.

Keywords

Affective Response Creativity Approach Axiomatic Design Method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barnes, C., Southee, C., Henson, B.: The Impact of Affective Design of Product Packaging Upon Consumer Purchase Decisions. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, pp. 134-135 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, L.L., Wang, G.F., Hsiao, K.A., Liang, J.: Affective Product Shapes through Image Morphing, In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, pp. 11–16 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chou, J.R.: Applying a Creativity-based Design Process to New Product Development. Ph.D. Dissertation. Institute of Industrial Design, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan, R.O.C (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chuang, M.C., Chang, C.C., Hsu, S.H.: Perceptual Factors Underlying User Preferences Toward Product Form of Mobile Phones. Int. J. Industrial Ergonomics 27, 247–258 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crozier, R.: Manufactured Pleasures-Psychological Responses to Design. Manchester University Press, Manchester (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cross, N.: Engineering design methods: Strategies for product design, 3rd edn. Wiley, Chichester, UK (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Demirbilek, O., Sener, B.: Product Design, Semantics and Emotional Response. Ergonomics 46, 1346–1360 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heap, J.: The Management of Innovation and Design. Cassell, London (1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hsiao, K.A.: Affective Responses of Product Shapes. Ph.D. Dissertation, Institute of Design, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hsiao, K.A., Chen, L.L.: Fundamental Dimensions of Affective Responses to Product Shapes. Int. J. Industrial Ergonomics 36, 553–564 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hsu, S.H., Chuang, M.C., Chang, C.C.: A semantic Differential Study of Designers’ and Users’ Product Form Perception. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 25, 375–391 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu, M., Yang, K., Taguchi, S.: Enhancing Robust Design with the Aid of TRIZ and Axiomatic Design (Part I). TRIZ Journal (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jiao, J., Zhang, Y., Helander, M.: A Kansei mining system for affective design. Expert Systems with Applications 30, 658–673 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    John, J.C.: Design Method. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khalid, H.M., Helander, M.G.: A Framework for Affective Customer Needs in Product Design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 5, 27–42 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, D.G., Suh, N.P.: Axiomatic Design and Fabrication of Composite Structures. Oxford University Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, Y.C., Deng, Y.S.: A Design System Integrating TRIZ Method and Case-Based Reasoning Approach. In: Proceedings of the 8th International DDSS Conference, pp. 387–402 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., Tannenbaum, P.H.: The Measurement of Meaning. Illinois Press, US (1957)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petiot, J.-F., Yannou, B.: Measuring Consumer Perceptions for a Better Comprehension, Specification and Assessment of Product Semantics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 33, 507–525 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang, K., Zhang, H.: A Comparison of TRIZ and Axiomatic Design. In: Proceeding of the 1st ICAD, Cambridge, MA, pp. 235–242 (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang, S., Nagamachi, M., Lee, S.: Rule-Based Inference Model for the Kansei Engineering System. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 24, 459–471 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ming-Luen Chang
    • 1
  • Ji-Hyun Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Computational Design, National Yunlin University of Science & Technology, 123 Section 3, University Road, Douliou, Yunlin 64002, TaiwanR.O.C

Personalised recommendations