進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-1601202021104200
論文名稱(中文) 感性評價與知覺價值之應用研究:以汽車內裝設計為例
論文名稱(英文) Exploring the Application of Kansei Evaluation and Perceived Value Dimensions: A Case Study on Automotive Interior Design
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 工業設計學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial Design
學年度 108
學期 1
出版年 108
研究生(中文) 梁靜謙
研究生(英文) Ching-Chien Liang
學號 P38981128
學位類別 博士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 72頁
口試委員 指導教授-陳國祥
指導教授-何俊亨
口試委員-馬敏元
口試委員-陳璽任
召集委員-張育銘
口試委員-陳重任
中文關鍵字 感性工學  感性評價  知覺價值  感官經驗  汽車內裝設計 
英文關鍵字 Kansei Engineering  Kansei Evaluation  Perceived Value  Sensory Experience  Automotive Interior Design 
學科別分類
中文摘要

摘要

汽車的發明,改變人類生活並成為重要的交通工具,隨製造技術演進,當代汽車發展不僅追求性能與動力,設計亦重視車輛使用者感性需求。汽車內裝設計與使用者的感性需求認同程度,未見前人加以探討,亦缺少相關審慎客觀的研究報導。
因此本研究根基感性工學理論,運用體驗與評價之實驗方式,建構汽車內裝設計之感性評估模式。實驗分為二個階段,體驗方面,以「感性評價」方法進行實車體驗,歸納出影響受測者對於內裝感受程度之具體設計元素;評價方面,以「知覺價值評價」方法進行訪談,歸納影響受測者在心理上對內裝設計價值感之因素,最終綜合及分析二個實驗結果,建構感性評估模式。
首先在「感性評價」實驗階段,邀請60位受測者,針對適用於內裝設計的8個感性語彙進行評量,利用數量化I類方法統計汽車內裝12個項目、40個類目的元素權重,結果顯示在「豪華的」、「有趣的」、「活潑的」、「動感的」、「精準的」、「科技的」感受上,皆是以「中控台造型」之偏相關係數最高,類目得點為「觸控式螢幕」;在「時尚的」感受上,其偏相關係數最高為「冷氣出風口顏色」,類目得點為「銀框+銀扇葉」;「休閒的」感受,偏相關係數最高為「中控台與飾板搭配材質」,類目得點為「塑料+仿木_柚木」。
接續在「知覺價值評價」實驗階段,訪談受測者並評量影響四個知覺價值構面的程度,並以因素分析方法萃取出九個因素,其中「科技的」和「豪華的」、「活潑的」和「休閒的」感受,各有四個因素相同,顯示對內裝設計感受上的相同性。
綜和二個實驗結果後,以影響受測者心理上的價值感因素,連結至具體內裝設計元素,建立關連性。其中之內裝感覺「有趣的」與「動感的」在「振奮品質」因素可對應5個設計元素;「活潑的」「休閒的」在「輕鬆自在」因素可對應4個設計元素;「科技的」「豪華的」在「奢華氣派」與「尊榮形象」因素中,可對應6個設計元素。
本研究運用感性工學理論方法,結合體驗與評價之實驗方式,建立汽車內裝設計感性評估模式,成果盼能拋磚引玉,提供相關領域設計師與研究人員,期使汽車內裝設計更符合使用者期待。

關鍵詞:感性工學,感性評價,知覺價值,感官經驗,汽車內裝設計



英文摘要

ABSTRACT

The invention of automobiles changed humans’ lives, and they became a major means of transport. With the evolution of manufacturing technologies, the contemporary automobile development not only pursues performance and power but also designs that value the sensible demands of car users. The identification level of automobiles’ interior designs to users’ sensible demands has not been discussed before, and related rigorous and objective studies or reports remain extremely rare.
Therefore, this study, based on the Kansei engineering theory, conducted experience and evaluation experiments to construct a sensible evaluation model for automobile interior design. The experiments were divided into two phases. For the experience aspect, “sensible evaluation” was used to evaluate the actual car experience and determine the concrete design elements that influenced the participants’ sensibility levels regarding interior designs. For the evaluation aspect, “perceptual value evaluation” was used through interviews, and the factors that influenced the participants’ psychological senses of value for the interior designs were determined. Finally, the results of the two experiments were combined and analyzed to construct a sensible evaluation model.
During the experimental phase of “sensory experience”, 60 participants were invited to evaluate interior designs targeting 8 sensible terms. Type I quantization was used to calculate the elemental weights of 12 items and 40 categories of automobile interior designs. The results indicated that for the terms “luxurious”, “interesting”, “vigorous”, “dynamic”, “precise”, and “technological”, the partial correlation coefficients for the “center console design” were the highest, and the highest category score was for “touchscreen”. For the term “fashionable”, the partial correlation coefficient for the “color of the air vent” was the highest, and the highest category score was for “silver frame + silver fan blade”. For the term “recreational”, the partial coefficient for “center console and door panel material” was the highest, and the category score was highest for “wood-plastic composite (teakwood)”.
During the experimental phase of “perceived value evaluation”, participants were interviewed, and the influence levels of four perceptual value dimensions were evaluated. Nine factors were extracted using factor analysis, and the terms “technological”, “luxurious”, “vigorous”, and “recreational” each had four identical factors, indicating the high homogeneity among feelings toward interior designs.
The results of the two experiments were combined. The factors that influenced the psychological senses of value of the participants were aligned with the concrete elements of the interior designs to establish their relevance. The terms “interesting” and “dynamic” used to describe interior designs could correspond to five design elements in the “excitement quality” factor category. The terms “vigorous” and “recreational” could correspond to four design elements in the “relaxing and comfort” factor category. The terms “technological” and “luxurious” could correspond to six design elements in the “luxury and splendor” and “esteemed image” factor categories. This study combined experience and evaluation methods to establish a sensible evaluation model for automobile interior designs. The results should provide useful information for designers and researchers in related fields to make the interior designs of automobiles better conform to users’ expectations.

Keywords: Kansei Engineering, Kansei Evaluation, Perceived Value, Sensory Experience, Automotive Interior Design



論文目次

CONTENTS


ABSTRACT I
ACKNOWLEGEMENT IV
CONTENTS V
LIST OF TABLES VII
LIST OF FIGURES VIII
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Research Scope and Limitations 3
1.3 Research Process and Purpose 5
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Kansei Engineering 8
2.2 Automotive Interior 9
2.3 Sensory Experience 11
2.3.1 Visual of Car Interior Kansei Design 13
2.3.2 Emotional Design on Psychological and Physiological Needs 16
2.3.3 Gestalt Psychology 17
2.3.4 Cognitive Psychology 18
2.4 Perceived value evaluation 20
2.5 Quantification Method I Analysis 22
2.6 Summary 23
CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENT 1: SENSORY EXPERIENCE 25
3.1 Experiment Design 28
3.1.1 Kansei keyword selection 28
3.1.2 Vehicle sample selection 28
3.1.3 Expert interviews and interior component classification 31
3.1.4 Participant selection and analysis 36
3.2 Experiment Analysis and Statistics 39
3.3 Summary 44
CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENT 2: PERCEIVED VALUE EVALUATION 47
4.1 Experiment Design 47
4.2 Experiment Analysis and Statistics 48
4.3 Summary 52
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 55
5.1 Conclusions 55
5.2 Suggestions 56
5.3 Suggestions for Follow-up Research 57
REFERENCES 58
APPENDIX 63
LIST OF PUBLICATION 70



LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Relationship between R coefficient and reliability 23
Table 3.1 Cluster center value calculation 27
Table 3.2 Vehicle samples used in the Experiment 1 29
Table 3.3 The list of automotive experts 31
Table 3.4 Questionnaire interview record 32
Table 3.5 Automotive interior design classification 35
Table 3.6 Description of the participants 37
Table 3.7 Analysis of interior design items stratified by luxurious, interesting, fashionable, and vigorous. 40
Table 3.8 Keyword analysis: recreational, dynamic, precise, and technological. 42
Table 3.9 Category weights 46
Table 4.1 Exploratory factor analysis for the Quality dimension 48
Table 4.2 Exploratory factor analysis for the Emotion dimension 49
Table 4.3 Exploratory factor analysis for the Price dimension 50
Table 4.4 Exploratory factor analysis for the Society dimension 51
Table 4.5 Correlations among the experimental results 54



LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Experimental procedures 7
Figure 2.1 Dashboard information architecture 14
Figure 2.2 Volvo V60 Plug-in Hybrid Instrument dashboard 15
Figure 2.3 Nissan 2011-2015 Juke inner door handle 16
Figure 2.4 Expanded Model of Customer Loyalty 21
Figure 2.5 Experimental description 24
Figure 3.1 Rating the keywords on a scale of 1 to 5 points 26
Figure 3.2 Keyword clustering 26
Figure 3.3 Interior design of sample models 30
Figure 3.4 Automotive interior space. 34
Figure 3.5 Touchscreen devices 44
Figure 3.6 Silver frames and silver fan blades 45
Figure 3.7 Plastic materials with imitation teakwood trims 45



參考文獻

REFERENCES

Asano, H. (1998). An hierarchical representation of the consumer value structure using qualitative data. Report of Modeling the Evaluation Structure of Kansei, 2, 223-231.
Bridger, R. S. (2009). Introduction to Ergonomic. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, 1-32.
Carvalho, R., & Soares, S. (2012). Ergonomic and usability analysis on a sample of auto-mobile dashboards. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation, 41(Supplement 1), 1507-1514.
Chakrabarti, A. (2010). A course for teaching design research methodology. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 24(3), 317-334.
Chen, K. S. (2009). Kansei Engineering. Quality Journal, 45(4), 21-22.
Chen, K. S., Guan, S. S., Deng, I. H., & Chang, Y. M. (2000). Exploring teaching methods in Kansei Engineering education. Industrial Design, 28(2), 160-165.
Chen, K. S., Guan, S. S., Deng, I. H., & Chang, Y. M. (2001). Kansei Engineering Rational Inductive Method. Industrial Design, 29(1), 2-16.
Chen, S. H. (1997). The automobile buyers' thinking items and influence factors research (Unpublished master's thesis). National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, R. O. C.
Chen, T. X. (1998). Sensation & Perception. In Kao, H.S.R. (Eds.), Psychology: The Study or Science (pp. 52-82). Taipei: Yang-Chih Book Co., Ltd.
Conley, J., & McLaren, A. (Ed.). (2016). Car Troubles: Critical Studies of Automobility and Auto-Mobility. London & New York: Routledge.
Demirbilek, O., & Sener, B. (2003). Product design, semantics and emotional response. Ergonomics, 46(13/14), 1346-1360.
Demirbilek, O., & Sener, B. (2003). Product design, semantics and emotional response, Ergonomics, 46(Nos 13-14), 1346-1360.
Gallarza M., Saura I.G., & Garcia H.C. (2002). Destination Image: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Annals of Tourism Research , 29(1), 56-78.
Gartman, D. (2004). Three Ages of the Automobile: The Cultural Logics of The Car. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(4-5), 169-195.
Gerrig, R.J., & Zimbardo, P.G. (2010). Psychology and Life (19th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Gescheider, G. A. (1997). Psychophysics: The fundamentals (3rd Ed.). Chapter 1, London: Erlbaum, 1-15.
Gleitman, H., Gross, J., & Reisberg, D. (2011). Psychology (8th Ed.). New York, London: W.W. Norton & Company.
Jindo, T. & Hirasago, K. (1997). Application studies to car interior of Kansei engineering. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 19(2), 105-114.
Jindo, T., & Hirasago, K. (1997). Application studies to car interior of Kansei engineering. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 19(2), 105–114.
Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing Pleasurable Products. London: CRC Press, 18-26; 161-165.
Kamp, I. (2012). The influence of car-seat design on its character experience. Applied Ergonomics, 43(2), 329-335.
Karlsson, B., Aronsson, N., & Svensson, K. (2003). Using semantic environment description as a tool to evaluate car interiors. Ergonomics, 46(13-14), 1408-1422.
Katz, D. (1935). The world of colour. trans. R.B. MacLeod from the 2nd German Ed., 1930. London: Kegan Paul. (First German edition, 1911)
Katz, D. (1999). The world of colour. trans. R.B. MacLeod and C.W. Fox. Abingdon: Routledge. (First German edition, 1911)
Kitajima, M. & Kim, D. H. (1999). Communicating kansei design concept via artifacts-a cognitive scientific approach. Report of Modeling the Evaluation Structure of Kansei, 337-343.
Liang, C. C., Lee, Y. H., Ho, C. H., & Chen, K. H. (2019). Investigating vehicle interior designs using models that evaluate user sensory experience and perceived value. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 1-20.
Lin, W. B. (2007). An empirical of service quality model from the viewpoint of management. Expert Systems With Applications (32)2, 364-375.
Nagamachi, M. (1989). Kansei Engineering. Kaibundo , Tokyo.
Nagamachi, M. (1995). Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15(1), 3-11.
Norman D. A. (1998). The Invisible Computer: why good products can fail, the personal computer is so complex and information appliances are the solution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 23-50, 185-202.
Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (2000). The impact of technology on the quality value loyalty chain: A research agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 168-174.
Pu, W. P., Chen, K., & Shieh, M. D. (2015). The effect of co-design and flow experience on customer satisfaction and purchase intention online. Issues in Business Management and Economics, 3(4), 59-66.
Roberson, D., Davidoff, J., Davies, I. R. L., & Shapiro, L. R. (2005). Color categories: Evidence for the cultural relativity hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 50(4), 378-411.
Rosli, M., Ariffin, M., Sapuan, S. & Sulaiman, S. (2014). Survey of Malaysian car owner needs of a car interior. International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering, 14(1), 62-69.
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1992). Human factors in engineering and design (7th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shaw S., Escobar C., Lee S. (2018). Using Interior Design Principles to Improve the User’s Perception of Vehicle Interiors: A Study on Visual Parameters. In Stanton N. (Eds.) Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp. 467-473). vol 597. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Shen, K. S., Chen, K. H., Liang, C. C., Pu, W. P., & Ma, M. Y. (2015). Measuring the functional and usable appeal of Crossover B-Car interiors. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 25(1), 106-122.
Simms, T. M. (1967). Pupillary response of male and female subjects to pupillary difference in male and female picture stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 2(11), 533-555.
Smith, S., & Fu, S. H. (2011). The relationships between automobile head-up display presentation images and drivers’ Kansei. Displays, 32(2), 58-68.
Solso, R. L. (2001). Cognitive psychology (6th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (Original work published 1979)
Soota, T., Singh, H. and Mishra, R. (2008). Defining characteristics for product development using quality function deployment: a case study on Indian bikes. Quality Engineering (20)2, 195-208
Sternberg, R.J. (2000). Pathways to Psychology (2nd Ed.). New York: Harcourt, A Division of Thomson Learning, Inc.
Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203-220.
Tofle, R. B., Schwartz, B., Yoon, S., & Max-Royale, A. (2004). Color in healthcare environments: A critical review of the research literature. Concord, CA: The Coalition for Health Environments Research (CHER).
Wagner, A.‐S., Kilincsoy, Ü., & Vink, P.(2018). Visual customization: Diversity in color preferences in the automotive interior and implications for interior design. Color Research and Application, 43, 471-488.
Wilcox, T., Woods, R., & Chapa, C. (2008). Color–function categories that prime infants to use color information in an object individuation task. Cognitive Psychology, 57(3), 220-261.
Woodruff, R. T. B. (1997). Customer value: The next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 139-153.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2-22.
Zheng, C. Q. (1995). The study on the image perception and position of domestic brands of sedan by the application of non-metric multidimensional scaling method (Unpublished master's thesis). National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan, R. O. C.



論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2025-01-01起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2025-01-01起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw