Perceptual Richness and Aesthetic Sensibility in Traditional and Modern Product Designs: A Cross-Cultural Kansei Study using African Inspired Product Designs

Oluwafemi Samuel Adelabu
Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Japan

Toshimasa Yamanaka
Faculty of Art and Design, University of Tsukuba, Japan

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 100:97, s. 1155-1169

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2014-06-11

ISBN: 978-91-7519-276-5

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)


Why do people tend to value an old product over a modern one? This study aims to explore cross-culturally; the conceptual basis of perceiving aesthetic values in product design characterized as being traditional and modern. To this end; a quasi-experiment was designed to evaluate the cognitive and affective richness in the aesthetic appreciation of both traditional and modern objects. For this experiment; 15 culturally inspired African products were pre-selected and classified into three categories; each class representing the different level of visibility of cultural elements in the sampled objects. 20 African subjects and 20 East-Asians including Japanese and Koreans studying at the University of Tsukuba participated in the survey test by doing a visual evaluation for the selected product samples using semantic differential and self-assessment manikin questionnaires. Having subjects from two distinct regional cultures provides a platform for cross-cultural comparison and discussion on the value perception style for typical traditional and modern products. The result outlines similarities and disparities of two cultural domains for the three product categories.


Product design evaluation; Visual perception; Aesthetics; Kansei value; Cross-cultural study


Adelabu; O. S.; & Yamanaka; T. (2014). Kansei as a function of aesthetic perception in product design. In J. Watada (Eds.); Industrial applications of affective engineering (pp. 83-95).

Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Beuttel; B. (2010). Kansei research and design. Tsukuba: Kansei Information Laboratory; University of Tsukuba.

Bradley; M.; & Lang; P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: the self-assessment semantic differential manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavioural Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry; 25(1); 49-59.

Budd; M. (1998). Aesthetics. Retrieved from http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/M046.

Chen; L. L. (in press). Contradictory semantics for kansei design. In T. Yamanaka & O. S. Adelabu (Eds.); Kansei and Design: Without Borders. Tsukuba: Kansei Information Laboratory; University of Tsukuba.

Crilly; N.; Moultrie; J.; & Clarkson; P. (2004). Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies; 25(6); 547-577.

Gracyk; T. (2003). Hume’s aesthetics. Retrieved October 1; 2013; from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-aesthetics/.

Hekkert; P. (2006). Design aesthetics: principles of pleasure in design. Psychology Science; 48(2). Retrieved October 1; 2013; from http://www.pabst-publishers.de/psychology-science/2-2006/06_Hekkert.pdf.

Hung; W. K.; & Chen; L. L. (2012). Effects of novelty and its dimensions on aesthetic preference in product design. International Journal of Design; 6(2); 81-90.

Kenya; H. (2007). Designing Design. Tokyo: Lars Müller Publishers.

Kim; S. K.; Cho; Y. I.; Niki; K.; & Yamanaka; T. (2012). Effect of information assimilation on product evaluation. Proceedings of DESIGN 2012; the International Design Conference. Dubrovnik; Croatia.

Kluckhohn; C. (1951). Values and value orientations in the theory of action. In T. Parsons & E. A. Shils (Eds.); Toward a general theory of action (pp. 388–433). Cambridge; MA: Harvard University Press.

Koren; L. (2010). Which “aesthetics” do you mean? Ten definitions. California: Imperfect Publishing.

Lee; K. (2010). Culture; Interface Design; and Design Methods for Mobile Devices. In A. Marcus; et al. (Eds.); Mobile TV: Customizing Content and Experience; Human-Computer Interaction Series (pp. 27–66).

Lévy; P.; & Yamanaka; T. (2009). Kansei studies description and mapping through kansei study keywords. Kansei Engineering International Journal; 8 (2); 179–185. Retrieved October 1; 2013; from http://pie.kansei.tsukuba.ac.jp/epierrot/?p=142.

Lin; R. (2007). Transforming Taiwan aboriginal cultural features into modern product design. International Journal of Design; 1(2); 45–53. Retrieved October 1; 2013; from http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/article/viewFile/46/18.

Miyong; L.; & Seunghee; L. (2007). Kansei evaluation of the product design using visual images – focus on the impression of product appearance abstract : In Proceedings of the International Association of Societies of Design Research (pp. 1–12). Hong Kong.

Moalosi; R.; Popovic; V.; & Hickling-hudson; A. (2007). Product analysis based on botswana’s postcolonial socio-cultural perspective. International Journal of Design; 1(2); 35–43. Retrieved October 1; 2013; from http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/10/24.

Norman; D. A. (2004). Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York; NY: Basic Books.

Osgood; C. E.; Suci; G. J.; & Tannenbaum; P. (1967). The measurement of Meaning. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

Sanabria Zepeda; J. C. (2012). The role of familiarity and creativity in the generation of affective responses to advertising: proposal and evaluation of a pairing-congruity method (Doctoral dissertation; University of Tsukuba). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2241/117587.

Sternberg; R. J. (1996). Cognitive Psychology. New York; NY: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Yanagi; M. (1989). The unknown craftsman: a Japanese insight into beauty. Tokyo: Kodansha International.

Citeringar i Crossref