Assessing Designers’ Perception, Analysis, and Reflective Using Verbal Protocol Analysis

  • Muhammad Jameel Mohamed Kamil
  • Shahriman Zainal Abidin
  • Oskar Hasdinor Hassan
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 134)


This paper examines designers’ response toward the theory of unconscious interaction and cognitive of human behavior in the everyday product. During the Verbal Protocol Analysis (VPA) study, 30 designers were given four selected images which have been categorized into four attributes of unconscious interaction in everyday human behavior. At the same time, they were asked to verbally respond to following aspects: (1) their perception toward the attributes of the unconscious interaction of human behavior in everyday life; (2) their analysis on the given images; and (3) their reflection of those given images. The contribution of the study led to the identification of designers’ abilities to perceive, understand, analyze, and reflect in enhancing the value of an existing product by interpreting the design needs from the four attributes of unconscious interaction in everyday human behavior.


Verbal protocol analysis Product design Methodology 


  1. 1.
    Suri, J.F.: Thoughtless Acts Observation on Intuitive Design (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wakkary, R., Maestri, L.: Aspects of everyday design: resourcefulness, adaptation, and emergence. Int. J. Human Comput. Interact. 24(5), 478–491 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sohn, M., Nam, T., Lee, W.: Designing with unconscious human behaviors for eco-friendly interaction. In: Proceeding of 27th International Conference Extended Abstract on Human Factors Computing System, p. 2651. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hua, M., Fei, Q.: The value of unconscious behavior on interaction design. In: 2009 IEEE 10th International Conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design & Conceptual Design, pp. 336–339 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waddington, N.J., Wakkary, R.: Everyday design through the lens of embodied interaction. In: GRAND Annual Conference, pp. 2–4 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kamil, M.J.M., Abidin, S.Z.: Unconscious human behavior at visceral level of emotional design. In: Procedia—Social and Behavior Science, vol. 105, pp. 149–161 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kamil, M.J.M., Abidin, S.Z.: The value of unconscious human behavior in product design innovation. In: 2nd International Conference on Technology, Informatics, Management, Engineering & Environment Bandung, Indonesia, pp. 123–127 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kamil, M.J.M., Abidin, S.Z.: Unconscious interaction between human cognition and behaviour in everyday product: a study of product form entities through freehand sketching using design syntactic analysis. In: International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, pp. 369–374. Loughborough University, UK (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alexander, C.: Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1964)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bargh, J. A.: The automaticity of everyday life. J. Adv. Soc. Cogn. 10 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dijksterhuis, A., Smith, P.K., Baaren, R.B., Wigboldus, D.H.J.: The unconscious consumer: effects of environment on consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 15(3), 193–202 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cleeremans, A.: Conscious and unconscious cognition: a graded, dynamic perspective. Control 1, 401–418 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Skinner, B.: Science and Human Behavior. Simon and Schuster, New York, Appleton (1953)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suwa, M., Purcell, T., Gero, J.: Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions. Des. Stud. 19, 455–483 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cash, P., Kreye, M.: Exploring uncertainty perception as a driver of design activity. Des. Stud. 54, 50–79 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cash, P., Kreye, M.: Uncertainty Driven Action (UDA) model: a foundation for unifying perspectives on design activity. Des. Sci. (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mason, P.: Visual data in applied qualitative research: lessons from experience. Qual. Res. 5(3), 325–346 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burri, R.V.: Visual rationalities: towards a sociology of images. Curr. Sociol. 60(1), 45–60 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Munhall, P.: Perception. In: The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, pp. 607–608. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Merriam-Webster: Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster Incorporated (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Valkenburg, R., Dorst, K.: The reflective practice of design teams. Des. Stud. 19(3), 249–271 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Jameel Mohamed Kamil
    • 1
  • Shahriman Zainal Abidin
    • 2
  • Oskar Hasdinor Hassan
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Product Design, School of the ArtsUniversiti Sains MalaysiaPenangMalaysia
  2. 2.Formgiving Design Research GroupUniversiti Teknologi MARASelangorMalaysia

Personalised recommendations