Advertisement

Impact of Topological Perception on Attention for Products Shape

  • FEI Fei
  • Yukari Nagai
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 135)

Abstract

A primitive and general function of the visual system is the perception of global topological properties. People will give priority to attending the global topological properties of object compared with the local geometric properties. The purpose of this paper is to verify whether topological properties perception is applicable to product recognition. If the topological properties variation occurs in the shape of the product, the product will get much attention, and the product will have the opportunity to be aware of the innovations that cannot be felt by the vision, such as function, experience, and so on. Therefore, topological properties perception is helpful to product innovation. Therefore, this study hypothesized that the perception of topological properties (holes, connectivity, and inside/outside) exists in the shapes of the products, and human can pay attention to the products that are relational to the variation of topological transformation occurred in the shapes. From the experiment of bicycles recognition, we ascertain people will pay attention to the bicycles with the topological properties variation. Repertory grid technique can find out the reasons for attention and distinguish them. We extracted the mental constructs of the participants for the products with topological variation and identified the reason of visual attention.

Keywords

Topological perception Visual perception Attention Product shape Design 

References

  1. 1.
    Bar, M., Neta, M.: Humans prefer curved visual objects. Psychol. Sci. 17(8), 645–648 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, L.: Topological structure in visual perception. Science 218(4573), 699–700 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, L.: The topological approach to perceptual organization. Visual Cogn. 12(4), 553–637 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Creusen, M.E., Schoormans, J.P.: The different roles of product appearance in consumer choice. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 22(1), 63–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., Clarkson, P.J.: Shaping things: intended consumer response and the other determinants of product form. Des. Stud. 30(3), 224–254 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dodwell, P.C.: The Lie transformation group model of visual perception. Percept. Psychophys. 34(1), 1–16 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Holman, D.: Using repertory grids in management. J Eur. Ind. Training 20(3), 3–30 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Easterby-Smith, M.: The design, analysis and interpretation of repertory grids. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 13(1), 3–24 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Janlert, L.E., Stolterman, E.: The character of things. Des. Stud. 18(3), 297–314 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luchs, M., Swan, K.S.: Perspective: the emergence of product design as a field of marketing inquiry. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28(3), 327–345 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mugge, R., Schoormans, J.P.: Product design and apparent usability. The influence of novelty in product appearance. Appl. Ergon. 43(6), 1081–1088 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nagai, Y., Noguchi, H.: An experimental study on the design thinking process started from difficult keywords: modeling the thinking process of creative design. J. Eng. Des. 14(4), 429–437 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Navon, D.: Forest before trees: the precedence of global features in visual perception. Cogn. Psychol. 9(3), 353–383 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Norman, D.A.: The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic Books (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Palmer, S.E.: Vision science: photons to phenomenology. MIT press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pomerantz, J.R., Sager, L.C., Stoever, R.J.: Perception of wholes and of their component parts: some configural superiority effects. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 3(3), 422 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pomerantz, J.R.: Visual form perception: An overview. Pattern recognition by humans and machines: visual perception 2, 1–30 (1986)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pomerantz, J.R.: Wholes, holes, and basic features in vision. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(11), 471–473 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rindova, V.P., Petkova, A.P.: When is a new thing a good thing? technological change, product form design, and perceptions of value for product innovations. Organ. Sci. 18(2), 217–232 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Treisman, A.M., Gelade, G.: A feature-integration theory of attention. Cogn. Psychol. 12(1), 97–136 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Underhill, P.: Why We Buy: the Science of Shopping. Texere, London (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wu, T.Y., Chen, H.K.: Products with biomimetic shapes convey emotions more effectively. In International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability, pp. 559–566. Springer International Publishing (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Japan Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyNomiJapan
  2. 2.Dalian Polytechnic UniversityDalianChina

Personalised recommendations