Design Evaluation of Cars Taillights in India Based on Novelty and Typicality

  • Adireddi Balaji
  • Dhananjay Singh Bisht
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)


This paper presents a design research methodology to examine user perceptions about novelty and typicality in product design. This work approaches the concepts of novelty and typicality in product design through two different case studies. The first case study is a preliminary case study to explore and collect the descriptors related to novelty and typicality in car taillight designs in India using primary research. Using a survey, inputs from 72 design students were also collected regarding the most novel and most typical designs from among 100 taillight models. The second case study was conducted to assess the subjective perceptions about the five most novel and five most typical car models using descriptors of novelty and typicality found from the first case study. Nissan Leaf car taillights were found to be the most novel, and Chevrolet SRV car taillights were found to be most typical.


Design methodology Design research Novelty Typicality Car taillights 


  1. 1.
    Loken B, Ward J (1990) Alternative approaches to understanding the determinants of typicality. J Consum Res 17(2):111–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hekkert P, Snelders D, and Van Wieringen PCW (2003) ‘Most advanced, yet acceptable’: typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. Br J Psychol 94(1):111–124Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hung W-K, Chen L-L (2012) Effects of novelty and its dimensions on aesthetic preference in product design. Int J Des 6(2):81–90Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mukherjee A, Hoyer WD (2001) The effect of novel attributes on product evaluation. J Consum Res 28(3):462–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thurgood C, Hekkert P, Blijlevens J (2014) The joint effect of typicality and novelty on aesthetic pleasure for product designs: influences of safety and risk. Congress of the International Association of Empirical AestheticsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berlyne DE (1970) Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Percept Psychophys 8(5):279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mugge R, Schoormans JPL (2012) Product design and apparent usability. The influence of novelty in product appearance. Appl Ergonomics 43(6):1081–1088Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leder H, Carbon C-C (2005) Dimensions in appreciation of car interior design. Appl Cogn Psychol Official J Soc Appl Res Mem Cogn 19(5):603–618Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sluis-Thiescheffer W, Bekker T, Eggen B, Vermeeren A, De Ridder H (2016) Measuring and comparing novelty for design solutions generated by young children through different design methods. Des Stud 43:48–73Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Radford SK, Bloch PH (2011) Linking innovation to design: consumer responses to visual product newness. J Prod Innov Manag 28(s1):208–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adireddi Balaji
    • 1
  • Dhananjay Singh Bisht
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial DesignNational Institute of TechnologyRourkelaIndia

Personalised recommendations