進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-3008201217191300
論文名稱(中文) 功能性與使用性在不同產品上之吸引力探討
論文名稱(英文) Exploring the product appeal from functionality and usability through different examples
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 工業設計學系碩博士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial Design
學年度 100
學期 2
出版年 101
研究生(中文) 申開玄
研究生(英文) Kai-Shuan Shen
電子信箱 creativekevin2001@hotmail.com
學號 p38951157
學位類別 博士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 78頁
口試委員 指導教授-陳國祥
共同指導教授-馬敏元
口試委員-何明泉
口試委員-陳俊智
口試委員-鄧怡莘
召集委員-張育銘
口試委員-何俊亨
中文關鍵字 功能性  使用性  感性工學  魅力工學  吸引力  社群網路遊戲  汽車內裝  評價網路法(EGM)  數量化一類 
英文關鍵字 Functionality  usability  Kansei Engineering  Miryoku Engineering  appeal  SNS Game  car interior  EGM (The Evaluation Grid Method)  Quantification Theory Type I 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本論文旨在論述以感性工學為基礎下,透過兩個不同的人機互動設計例
子,包括臉書社群網路遊戲和跨界小型掀背車內裝,探討產品的功能性與使用性
的吸引力;而為何使用者偏好它們更勝於其他同型的產品,何種具體的特質讓使
用者愉悅地使用它們,功能性和使用性是如何影響產品的吸引力,還有是否產品
有必要在功能性或是使用性二者擇一都是本研究所欲探討的議題。在研究方法方
面,訪談了專家和利用問卷調查蒐集使用者偏好的資料,相信以偏好為基礎的研
究可以揭露產品吸引力的根本原因,並使用數量化一類進行資料分析。
本研究中發現,從專家訪談所決定的吸引力語意架構,揭示了介於吸引
力要素之間的階層關係、使用者偏好的理由和產品的具體特色;根據統計分析的
結果,吸引力的要素會受到使用者理由(項目)和設計特徵(類目)不同程度的影
響。其中,社群遊戲較大的吸引力要素為”容易方便的”,”友善和輕快的”和”社交互動的”;而小型掀背車三個吸引力要素則為”創新獨特的”、”舒適方便的”和”空間的靈活運用與創新變化”,這些要素都受到特別理由和特徵不同程度的影響。
本研究發現這兩類產品得以廣受歡迎是因為它們具有功能性和使用性
的吸引力特徵;而依類型的不同,產品在功能性或使用性上的吸引力也有不同;
根據本研究的結果,社群網路遊戲和小型掀背車內裝分別著重於使用性與功能
性。這兩個例子也證明了個別產品有它們主要的功能性或使用性的吸引力,而此
一發現可提供給產品設計師和研究者重要的資訊,也對於人機互動的領域做出貢
獻。
英文摘要 This thesis aims to explore the functional and usable appeal of product based on Kansei Engineering through two different examples of human-machine interaction
designs, including Facebook SNS games and Crossover B-Car interior. Why users prefer them to other types of designs, what specific characteristics give them pleasures
in using the them, how functionality and usability have influence on product appeal, and if different products have different priority levels for functionality and usability are the four major issues to be probed in the thesis. In the aspect of methodology, experts were interviewed and users were surveyed with questionnaires to gather the data about their preferences. Preference-based studies are believed to reveal the underlying reasons for the appeal of products. The collected data were analysed using Quantification Theory Type I.

This study found that the semantic structure of appeal shows the hierarchy of the relationship among appeal factors, the reasons for users’ preferences, and the specific characteristics of products. According to the statistical analysis, the greatest factors of appeal of SNS games are “easy and convenient”, “friendly and lively” and “social interactive” and the three appealing factors of Crossover B-Car interiors are “innovative and extraordinary”, “comfortable and convenient”, and “flexible and innovative space utility”. And all these are affected in varying degrees by particular reasons and characteristics.
The two products have become very popular due to their appealing functional and usable characteristics. The study found that different products have different priority
levels for functionality and usability appeal depending on the type of products. According to this study, SNS games and Crossover B-Car interiors lay particular stress on usability and functionality respectively considering their own product features. The results prove that products have their own main functional or usable purpose, and
provide important information for designers and researchers of products, and also contribute to the field of human-machine interaction.
論文目次 CONTENTS

ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………I
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………IV
CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………VI
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………VII
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………IX
Chapter 1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………1
1.1 Research objectives…………………………………………………………………………………………1
1.2 Appeal issues…………………………………………………………………………………………………………2
1.3 Functional and usable issues…………………………………………………………………3
1.4 The selected products for studying…………………………………………………4
Chapter 2 Review of the Literature………………………………………………………………10
2.1 Related works for SNS games…………………………………………………………………10
2.1.1 The usability issues of games………………………………………………10
2.1.2 SNS games as software interacting with players
through the Internet………………………………………………………………………11
2.1.3 SNS games facilitating social interaction
through social networking…………………………………………………………12
2.2 Related works for crossover B-Car interior…………………………13
2.2.1 Ergonomic evaluations……………………………………………………………………13
2.2.2 Emotional studies………………………………………………………………………………14
2.2.3 Innovation studies…………………………………………………………………………15
2.3 Kansei Engineering…………………………………………………………………………………………16
Chapter 3 Research Methods……………………………………………………………………………………19
3.1 Preparation……………………………………………………………………………………………………………21
3.1.1Data collection………………………………………………………………………………………21
3.1.2 Observation………………………………………………………………………………………………22
3.2 Expert evaluation……………………………………………………………………………………………22
3.2.1 The preparation for the EGM……………………………………………………24
3.2.2 Steps………………………………………………………………………………………………………………25
3.2.3 Subjects………………………………………………………………………………………………………26
3.3 User evaluation…………………………………………………………………………………………………27
3.3.1 Design of the questionnaire……………………………………………………27
3.3.2 The analysis of questionnaire survey……………………………29
3.3.3 Sampling………………………………………………………………………………………………………30
Chapter 4 Analysis and Results…………………………………………………………………………31
4.1 Initial experience and observation………………………………………………31
4.2 The hierarchical diagram of the two products……………………33
4.3 Quantification Theory Type I analysis………………………………………35
4.3.1 Measuring the appeal of Facebook SNS games……………36
Weighting the appeal of the “easy and convenient”
factor………………………………………………………………………………………………………………36
Weighting the appeal of the “social interactive”
factor………………………………………………………………………………………………………………38
Weighting the appeal of the “friendly and
lively” factor…………………………………………………………………………………………41
4.3.2 Measuring the appeal of crossover B-Car……………………43
Weighting the appeal of the “innovative and
extraordinary” factor………………………………………………………………………43
Weighting the appeal of the “flexible and
innovative space utility” factor…………………………………………46
Weighting the appeal of the “comfortable and
convenient” factor…………………………………………………………………………… 48
Chapter 5 Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………………………52
5.1 The appeal issues……………………………………………………………………………………………52
5.2 The usable and functional issues……………………………………………………53
5.3 The design issues……………………………………………………………………………………………56

Chapter 6 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………………………59
6.1 Findings and implications………………………………………………………………………59
6.2 Future Research…………………………………………………………………………………………………62

References………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………64

Appendix 1………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………69

Appendix 2………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………74

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 The best three “original images” selected from the
hierarchical diagram by tber of times they
appeared……………………………………………………………………………………………………………28
Table 2 The setting of the attribute items and
categories………………………………………………………………………………………………………28
Table 3 A comparison among the different types of SNS
games……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………32
Table 4 A comparison among the different types of
Crossover B-Cars………………………………………………………………………………………32
Table 5 The ranking from the hierarchical diagram by the
number of times the descriptions
appeared……………………………………………………………………………………………………………34
Table 6 The best three “original images” selected from
the hierarchical diagram by times of times they
appeared……………………………………………………………………………………………………………35
Table 7 The best three “original images” selected from the
hierarchical diagram by times of times they
appeared……………………………………………………………………………………………………………35
Table 8 The category scores for the factor of “Easy and
Convenient”……………………………………………………………………………………………………37
Table 9 The category scores for the factor of “Social
Interactive”…………………………………………………………………………………………………40
Table 10 The category scores for the factor of “Friendly
and Lively”……………………………………………………………………………………………………42
Table 11 The category scores for the factor of “Innovative
and Extraordinary”…………………………………………………………………………………45
Table 12 The category scores for the factor of “Flexible
and Innovative Space Utility”……………………………………………………47
Table 13 The category scores for the factor of “Comfortable
and Convenient”…………………………………………………………………………………………50

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Honda Fit exterior design………………………………………………………………8
Figure 2 Honda Fit interior design- capable of
accommodating luggage…………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 3 Honda Fit interior design- storage of
trunk……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 4 Honda Fit interior design- huge space for
storage………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 5 Honda Fit interior design- capable of
accommodating luggage…………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 6 Honda Fit interior design- huge space for
passengers………………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 7 Example of a participant’s evaluation structure:
The No.2 evaluation structure was constructed by
retrieving the words from an expert, who is
thirty six years old and married…………………………………………33
Figure 8 The hierarchical diagram of Crossover B-Car
interior preference of one participant by the
EGM………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………34
Figure 9 The hierarchical diagram of SNS Game preferences
by EGM: The general hierarchical diagram was
constructed by retrieving the words from all
seven experts. The numbers on the right side of
the words indicate the number of times that the
same opinion appeared………………………………………………………………………20
Figure 10 The hierarchical diagram of Crossover B-Car
interior preference by the EGM………………………………………………21
Figure 11 The screen shot of “Restaurant City” shows
the “simplified interface” in Restaurant
City……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………38
Figure 12 The figure shows “obtaining good evaluation form
others in “Restaurant City”………………………………………………………39
Figure 13 The figure shows that the drawing of “FarmVille”
presents a “rich color match” and “cute
form”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………43
Figure 14 “Changeable Interior Style”………………………………………………………45
Figure 15 “Seats Capable of Rotation”, “Revolutionary
Digitized Instrument Cluster”, and “Equipment
that Common Cars Do Not Have”…………………………………………………46
Figure 16 “Integrated Storage Space- Fillisters Designed as
Storage”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………48
Figure 17 “Designed to Accommodate Passenger Articles for
Daily Use”……………………………………………………………………………………………………48
Figure 18 “Family Space”, “High Top space”,
and “Individualized Space”…………………………………………………………51
Figure 19 “Good Design of Controllable Buttons”
and “Integrated Controllers for Easy
Control”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………58
參考文獻 References

Barnes, S. J. and Pressey, A.D. (2010), “Who needs cyberspace? Examining drivers of needs in Second Life”, Internet Research, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 236-254

BBC News. 2011, October 11. Social media revenue to hit $10bn in 2011, says Gartner. Available online at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4142184.stm(accessed 11 October 2011).

Bennett, J.L. Incorporating usability into system design: The opportunity for interactive computer graphics. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Cybernetics and Society (Tokyo-Kyoto. Japan, Nov. 3-7). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, 1978. pp. 1119-1124.

Berlyne, D. E. (Ed.). (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. London: Wiley.

Chakraborty, J. and Bligh, P.L. (2011), “Evaluation of video game interfaces”, Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Design for All and eInclusion Lecture Notes in Computer Science, in Stephanidis, C.(Ed.),Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, Vol. 6765/2011, 30-35

Chen, Y.C., Chen, P.S., Hwang, J.J., Korba, L., Song, R. and Yee, G. (2005), “An analysis of online gaming crime characteristics”, Internet Research, Vol. 15 No.3, pp. 246-261

Chu, Kimberly., Wong, C.Y. and Khong, C.W.(2011), “Methodologies for evaluating player experience in Game Play”, HCI International 2011 – Posters’ Extended Abstracts Communications in Computer and Information Science, in Stephanidis,C. (Ed.), Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin,Vol. 173, Part II, 118-122

Demirbilek, O., & Sener, B. (2003). Product design, semantics and emotional response. Ergonomics, 46(13/14), 1346–1360.

Dong, W. (2010), “The evaluation method for product form attractiveness based on Miryoku Engineering”, Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 44-47, pp. 86-90, available
at:http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=intr(accessed 25 November 2011).

Fashion, (2010). The best selling of VW Golf , AUTONET, Available from: http://vw.autonet.com.tw/cgi-bin/file_view.cgi?b0070478V1003002

Federoff, M.A. (2002), “Heuristics and Usability Guidelines for the Creation and Evaluation of Fun in Video Games”. (Unpublished master’s thesis, Department of Telecommunications of Indiana University).

Foley, J.D., and Van Dam, A. Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Graphics. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1982.
Goodwin, N.C. (1987, March), Functionality and Usability. Communications of the ACM, 30(3), 229-233.

Grobelny, J. and Michalski, R. (2011). Various approaches to a human preference analysis in a digital signage display design. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(6), 529-542

Hayashi, C. (1950), “On the Quantification of Qualitative Data from the Mathematico-Statistical Point of view”, Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 2,
No. 1, 35-47

Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & Van Wieringen, P. C. W. (2003). ‘Most advanced, yet acceptable’: typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in
industrial design. British Journal of Psychology, 94(1), 111–124.

Horn, D. and Salvendy, G. (2009). Measuring consumer perception of product creativity: impact on satisfaction and purchasability. Human Factors and Ergonomics in
Manufacturing & Service Industries, 19(3), 223-240

Iwabuchi, C., et al. (2001). Data Management and Analysis by Yourself, Japan: Humura publishing, pp180-185.

Järvinen, A. (2009). Game design for social networks: interaction design. Sandbox ’09 Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGGGRAPH Symposium on Video Games, pp.95-102

Jindo, T. and Hirasago, K.(1997). Application studies to car interior of Kansei engineering , Industrial Ergonomic 19, 105-114 Kaid, L. L. and Johnstoon, A. (1991). Negative versus positive television advertising in U.S. presidential campaigns, 1960-1988, Journal of Communication, 41(3), 53-
64

Karlsson, B. S. A., Aronsson, N., & Svensson, K. A. (2003). Using semantic environment description as a tool to evaluate car interiors. Ergonomics, 46(13/14), 1408–1422.

Kelly GA (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. 2 volumes, New York:Norton.

Kim, C., Lee, C., Lehto, M.R., & Yun, M.H. (2010). Affective evaluation of user impressions using virtual product prototyping. Human Factors and Ergonomics
in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(1), 1-13

Klimmt C, Hartmann T (2006) Effectance, self-efficacy, and the motivation to play video games. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences. (pp. 133-145). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Lai, X.F., (2009), “Making money by Facebook”. Business Today, Iss: 670, 76-84.

Laitinen, S. (2005), “Better games through usability evaluation and testing”. Available
online at http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20050623/laitinen_01.shtml
(accessed 25 November 2011).

Leder, H. and Carbon, C.C. (2005). “Dimensions in Appreciation of Car Interior Design”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19: 603-618

Lee, K.I., Jin, B.S., & Ji, Y.G. (2010). The scenario-based usability checklist development for home appliance design: a case study. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(1), 67-81

Liu, Y. (2003). Engineering aesthetics and aesthetic ergonomics: theoretical foundations and a dual process research methodology. Ergonomics, 46(13–14), 1273–1292.

Mohamed, H. and Jaafar, A. (2010), “Development and potential analysis of Heuristic Evaluation for Educational Computer Game (PHEG)”, Computer Sciences and Convergence Information Technology (ICCIT), 2010 5th International
Conference, Seoul, pp. 222-227

Nagamachi, M. (1995). “Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, pp. 3-11.

Nagamachi, M. (2002). “Kansei engineering as a powerful consumer-oriented technology for product development”, Applied Ergonomics, 33, pp. 289-294

Nagamachi, M. (2008), “Perspectives and the new trend of Kansi/affective engineering”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 20 Iss:4, pp.290-298

Nazir, A., Raza, S., Chuah, C,N. (2008), “Unveiling Facebook: Measurement Study of Social Network Based Applications”. In IMC '08: Proceedings of the 8th ACM
SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, pp. 43-56.
doi:10.1145/1452520.1452527 Key: citeulike:3805888

Nielsen, J. (1994), “Heuristic evaluation”. In: Nielsen, J., Mack, L., (Eds.), Usability
Inspection Methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 25–62.

Oatley, K. (1999), “Meetings of minds: Dialogue, sympathy, and identification in reading fiction”. Poetics, 26 (5-6), 439–454.

Reuding, T. (2004). Predictive Value of Assessing Vehicle Interior Design Ergonomics in a Virtual Environment, Journal of Computing and Information Science in
Engineering,Vol 4 Iss:2 pp. 109 doi:10.1115/1.1710867

Sanui, J. (1996), “Visualization of users' requirements: Introduction of the Evaluation Grid Method”. Proceedings of the 3rd Design & Decision Support Systems in Architecture & Urban Planning Conference, Vol.1, pp.365-374.

Schwarzer R, Knoll N (2007), “Functional roles of social support within the stress and coping process: A theoretical and empirical overview”. International Journal of
Psychology, 42(4), 243-252.

Shimizu, Y., Yanagishima, T., Jindo, T., & Nagamachi, M. (1989), Analyses of Automobile Interiors Using A Semantic Differential Method, Human Factors
and Ergonmics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, General Sessions, pp. 620-624 (5)

Snelders, D., & Hekkert, P. (1999). Association measures as predictors of product originality. Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 588–592.

Sugiyama, K., Nouel, K. (1996), “The basic for Survey and Analysis by Excel: A Collection of Tool for Planning and Design”, Japan: Kaibundo publishing,Tokyo, pp.51-62.

Walther, J.B. (1996), “Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal and Hyperpersonal Interaction”. Communication Research, 23, No 1, 3-43.

Wharton, C., Rieman, J., Lewis, C. and Polson, P. (1994), “The Cognitive Walkthrough
Method: A Practitioner’s Guide. In: J Nielsen, R L Mack”. (Eds.). Usability Inspection Methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. 105–140.

Wickens, C., Gordon, S., & Liu, Y. (1998). An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering (New York: Addison-Wesley-Longman).

Zaphiris, P. and Ang, C.S. (2007) Editorial: HCI Issues in Computer Games. Journal of Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 135–139

Zeng, L.E. (2007). The best selling of VW Golf , AUTONET, Available from: http://vw.autonet.com.tw/cgi-bin/file_view.cgi?a707079021035

Zhou, Tao. (2011), “Understanding online community user participation: a social influence perspective”, Internet Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 67-81
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2013-09-05起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2014-09-05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