| Summary: | 碩士 === 銘傳大學 === 設計管理研究所碩士班 === 92 === With the transaction of times, the economic development, the enhancement of per capita income and production techniques as well as the change of consumption patterns, the existence of a product means much more than the satisfaction of user’s basic requirements. Furthermore, the consumers have changed from passive users to active ones. It is, therefore, the precise identification of consumers’ feelings and needs that will make it possible for designers to transform the image of a product to consumers in a more subtle way. In the light of this, the perceptions of product form features and pattern recognition is one of the more appropriate ways in constructing new models of products.
This study is divided into three stages: the pilot survey, product semantic survey, and product form feature survey. In the pilot survey, emphasis was placed upon the selection of representative image word pairs and product samples. From the discussion with five experts, 14 product samples were picked out of 145 samples that were considered as good design products and 12 image word pairs as well as user’s preference were selected from 45 image adjective pairs. At the stage of product form feature survey, Delphi method was employed from which six experts were invited to discuss five form features of those 14 product samples through email and face to face conversation. At the product semantic survey stage, students of design and non-design backgrounds were invited to evaluate the 14 samples according to their first impression of 12 image words and preference. The data obtained were then analyzed through ANOVA, factor analysis, regression analysis to investigate if there exist significant differences between subjects in perceiving the sense of design in these product samples. The important images and the relationships between the principal components and product form features were discussed.
From the analysis, the following conclusions are reached:
(1) Subjects with design background look at products from the total product form to the details. Their preferences are based primarily on the testing images but not on their personal tastes. On the contrary, subjects without design background look at products only from the total product form and they often evaluate such products from their own subjective impression.
(2) Both two groups of subjects prefer products of high degree of design sense. The dominant images of design and non-design subjects belong to “evaluative images”, “emotional images”, and “quality images”. While the important images for all subjects are “fashion images”, “emotional images”, and “shape images”.
(3) In terms of the finish of the products of high design sense, the texture form feature has the biggest influence. Among them, the uniform texture has the biggest positive impact. On the contrary, the material feature, expectably the “functional image”, has the biggest negative impact.
(4) As far as the categories of products are concerned, the fashion images will cast a bigger influence upon the hi-tech products; the emotional images have a bigger impact on consumer goods; the shape images will have a limited influence upon the high design sense products.
(5) From the crosstab analysis of product category and design background, the consumer goods have the smallest differences; home appliance products the medium; and the hi-tech products the biggest. Among them, the small differences in consumer goods come from the fact that the subjects are generally of young generation while the bigger differences of hi-tech products are due to the fact that it is not easy for the public to get in touch with them.
|
|---|
