skip to main content
10.1145/2347504.2347529acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdppiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Affective engineering: towards a consumer culture theory approach to kansei engineering

Published:22 June 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

In recent days, companies find it extremely difficult to predict consumers' needs and requirements (Pickton and Broderick, 2005). While mass marketing arguably belongs to the past, it is now a less viable strategy to satisfy consumers by a single offer (Smith, 1956). Thus, the adoption of innovative and cross - disciplinary techniques might be a key factor in order to understand consumers and define their needs and requirements towards the design of new products. Affective engineering is a field of product design that deals with the translation of consumers' feelings for a product into design elements (Jordan 2000; Henson et al. 2006). Kansei engineering is an affective engineering methodology, in which tools and techniques from a wide variety of fields, such as psychology, ergonomics, information systems, sociology and marketing, are implemented, in order to link consumers' feelings and emotions with product properties and translate them into design elements (Nagamachi 1995; Schutte et al. 2004). The aim of this paper is to explore the kansei engineering field, from a consumer culture research perspective. Consumer Culture Theory 'refers to a family of theoretical perspectives that address the dynamic relationships between consumer actions, the marketplace, and cultural meanings' (Arnould and Thompson, 2005: p. 868). In order to achieve this, an introduction of a variety of qualitative tools and techniques currently utilized in consumer culture theory is made and an attempt to incorporate many of these methods within the kansei engineering field is conducted through the proposition of a theoretical framework.

References

  1. Alcantara E., Artacho M., Gonzalez J. and Garcia A. 2005. Application of product semantics to footwear design. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35, 3, 727--735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Arnold K. and Burkhard D. 2001. Kansei Engineering -From the Customers Point of View. Special Report LiTH-IKP-R-1226, IKP, Linkoping University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnould E. And Price L. 1993. River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the Service Encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 1, 24--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Arnould E. and Thompson C. 2005. Consumer culture theory (CCT): twenty years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 4, 868--882.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Belk R. 1989. Materialism and the Modern U. S. Christmas. In Interpretive Consumer Research, ed. Hirschman E. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 148--167.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Belk R. (1990). Halloween: An Evolving American Consumption Ritual. Advances in Consumer Research, 17. In Goldberg M., Gorn G. and Pollay R., (eds.). Association for Consumer Research, Provo: Utah, 508--517.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Belk R. and Costa A. 1998. The mountain man myth: a contemporary consuming fantasy. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 3, 218--240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Bergman B. and Klefsjo B. 1994. Quality: From customer needs to customer satisfaction. McGraw Hill: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Celsi R., Rose R. and Leigh T. 1993. An exploration of high-risk leisure consumption through skydiving. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 1, 1--24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Cova B. 1997. Community and consumption: towards a definition of the linking value of products or services. European Journal of Marketing, 31, 3/4, 297--316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Cova B. and Cova V. 2001. Tribal aspects of postmodern consumption research: The case of French in line roller skaters. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. 1, 1, 67--76.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Cova B. and Cova V. 2002. Tribal marketing: the tribalisation of society and its impact on the conduct of marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 36, 5/6, 595--620.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Cova B. and Pace S. 2006. Brand Community of Convenience Products: new forms of customer empowerment -- the case of "My Nutella The Community". European Journal of Marketing, 40, 9/10, 1087--1105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Faraday Packaging Partnership 2004. Affective Design (Kansei Engineering) in Japan. A report from a DTI International Technology Service Mission: UK Department of Trade and Industry, p. 20--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Denzin N. and Lincoln Y. 1984. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Dionisio P., Leal C. and Moutinho L. 2008. Fandom affiliation and tribal behaviour: a sports marketing application. Qualitative Market Research: An international Journal, 11, 1, 17--39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Firat F. and Shultz J. 1997. From segmentation to fragmentation. European Journal of Marketing, 1, 31, 183--205.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Glaser B. and Strauss A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine: Chicago.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Gill J. and Johnson P. 2002. Research Methods for Managers. 3rd Edition, Sage Publications: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordon W. and Langmaid R. 1988. Qualitative Market Research. A Practitioner's and Buyers Guide. Gower Publishing Company Limited: England.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Grismaeth K. 2007. Kansei engineering: linking emotions with product features. Department of Product Design, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, DOI= http://www.ivt.ntnu.no.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Hair J., Anderson R., Tatham R. and Black W. 1995. Multivariate data analysis with readings. Prentice-Hall International: New Jersey. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Henson B., Barnes C., Livesey R., Childs T. and Ewart K. (2006). Affective consumer requirements: A case study of moisturizer Packaging. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 14, 6, 187--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Hines T. and Quinn L. (2005). Socially Constructed Realities and the Hidden Face of Market Segmentation. Journal of Marketing Management, 21, 1, 529--544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Hirschman E. and LaBarbera P. 1989. The Meaning of Christmas, in Interpretive Consumer Research, (eds.) Hirschman E. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 136--147.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Hirschman E. 1992. The Consciousness of Addiction: Toward a General Theory of Compulsive Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 2, 155--179.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Holt D. 1995. How Consumers Consumer: A Taxonomy of Baseball Spectator's Consumption Practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1, 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Horiguchi M. and Takamasa S. 1995. A Kansei engineering approach to a driver/vehicle system. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, 25--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Ishihara S., Ishihara K, Nagamashi M. and Matsubara Y. 1997. An analysis of kansei structure on shoes using self - organizing neural networks. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 19, 93--104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Jindo T. and Hirasago K. 1997. Application studies to car interior of kansei engineering. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 19, 105--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Jordan P. 2000. Designing Pleasurable Products: An Introduction to the New Human Factors. Taylor & Francis: London, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Komazawa T. and Hayashi C. 1976. A statistical method for quantification of categorical data and its applications to medical science. In F. T. de Dombal and F. Gremy (eds), North-Holland Publishing Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Kozinets R. 1997. I want to believe: A netnography of the X-Philes Subculture of Consumption. Advances in Consumer Research, 24, 1, 470--475.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Kozinets R. 2001. Utopian enterprise: articulating the meanings of star trek's culture of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 1, 67--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Kozinets R. 2002. The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 1, 61--72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Kozinets R. 2010. Netnography - Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Sage Publications: London. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Lee S., Harada A. and Stappers J. 2002. Pleasure with products: Design based with kansei. In Pleasure with Products: Beyond usability (2002) Green W., Jordan P., Taylor and Francis: London, 219--229.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Lincoln Y. and Guba E. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage Publications: CA Beverly Hills.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Lindberg A. 2004. First impressions last. A Kansei engineering study on laminate flooring at Pergo. Department of Technology: Linköping University, DOI= http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:20030.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Maffesoli M. 1993. La contemplation du monde: figures du style communautaire, Grasset: Paris.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Maffesoli M. 1996. The Time of Tribes. Sage Publications: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Malhotra N. and Birks D. 2007. Marketing Research: An Applied Approach. 3rd European Edition, FT Prentice Hall: Harlow.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Moutinho L., Dionisio P. and Leal C. 2007. Surf Tribal Behaviour: A sports marketing application. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 25, 7, 668--690.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Muniz A. and O' Guinn, T. 2001. Brand Community. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 412--423.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Muniz A. and Hope J. 2005. Religiosity in the abandoned Apple Newton brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 4, 737--747.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Nagamachi M. 1995. Kansei engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, 1, 3--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Nagamachi M. 1997. Requirement identification of consumer's needs in product design. IEA '97, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health: Tampere, Finland, 231--233.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Nagamachi M. 2001. Workshop 2 on kansei engineering. Proceedings of the International conference on affective human factors design, Singapore.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Nagamachi M. 2002. Kansei engineering as a powerful consumer oriented technology for product development. Applied Ergonomics, 33, 3, 289--294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Nakada K. 1997. Kansei engineering research on the design of construction machinery. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 19, 3, 129--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Nagasawa S 2002. Kansei and Business. International Journal of Kansei Engineering, 3, 1, 2--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Nishino T., Nagamachi M. and Ishihara S. 2001. Rough set analysis on Kansei evaluation of color. Proceedings of The International Conference on Affective Human Factors Design, Singapore: Asian Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Osgood C., Suci G. and Tannenbaum P. 1969. Measurement of meaning. In Osgood C. and Snider G. (eds), Semantic differential technique - a source book, Chicago: Aldine publishing company, 56--82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Patterson M. 1998. Direct marketing in postmodernity: neotribes and direct communications. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 16, 1, 68--74.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Patton M. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Peñaloza L. 1998. Just doing it: a visual ethnographic study of spectacular consumption behavior at Nike town. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 2, 337--400.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Schouten J. 1991. Selves in Transition: Symbolic Consumption in Personal Rites of Passage and Identity Reconstruction. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 4, 412--425.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Schouten J. and McAlexander J. 1995. Subcultures of consumption: An ethnography of the new bikers. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1, 43--61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Schutte S. and Eklund J. 2001. An approach to kansei engineering-methods - A case study on design identity. Conference on human affective design, Singapore, Asian Academic Press: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Schutte S. 2002. Designing feelings into products: Integrating kansei engineering methodology in product development. Doctoral Thesis. Linköping Studies in Science and Technology, No. 946.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Schutte S. and Eklund J. 2003. Product design for heart and soul. Department for Human Systems Engineering, Linköpings Universitet Press: Sweden.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Schutte S., Eklund J., Axelsson J. and Nagamachi M. 2004. Concepts, methods and tools in kansei engineering. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science, 5, 3, 214 -231.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Schutte S. 2005. Engineering emotional values in product design - Kansei Engineering in development. Dissertation Thesis. Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. No 951, 35--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Sherry J. and McGrath M. 1989. Unpacking the holiday presence: A comparative ethnography of two gift stores. In Interpretive Consumer Research, ed. Hirschman E. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 148--167.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Shimizu Y. and Jindo T. 1995. A fuzzy logic analysis method for evaluating human sensitivities. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, 1, 39--47.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Skandalis A., Papantonopoulos S. and Koulouriotis D. 2008. Emotional and Semantic Product Design-Kansei Engineering: An Application in the design of milk cartons. 20th National Congress of the Hellenic Operational Research Society, Spetses, Greece.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith W. 1956. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing, 21, 1, 3--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Spiggle S. 1994. Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1, 491--503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Tedlock B. 1991. From Participant Observation to the Observation of Participation: The Emergence of Narrative Ethnography. Journal of Anthropological Research, 47, 1, 69--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Thatcher A., James J. and Todd A. 2005. Visual design of a webpage. Proceedings of CybErg. - The Fourth International Cyberspace Conference on Ergonomics. International Ergonomics Association Press: Johannesburg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Thompson C., Locander W. and Pollio H. 1989. Putting consumer experience back into consumer research: the philosophy and method of existential- phenomenology". Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 2, 133--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Thompson C. and Haytko D. 1997. Speaking of Fashion: Consumers' Uses of Fashion Discourses and the Appropriation of Countervailing Cultural Meanings. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 1, 15--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Thompson C. and Troester M. 2002. Consumer values systems in the age of postmodern fragmentation: the case of natural health microculture. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 4, 550--571.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Uusitalo L. 1998. Consumption in postmodernity: Social structuration and the construction of the self, the active consumer: novelty and surprise in consumer choice, Rutledge: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Valtonen A., Markuksela V. and Moisander J. 2010. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 34, 375--380.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Wallendorf M. and Arnould E. 1991. We gather together: consumption rituals of Thanksgiving Day. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 1, 13--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Affective engineering: towards a consumer culture theory approach to kansei engineering

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        DPPI '11: Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces
        June 2011
        492 pages
        ISBN:9781450312806
        DOI:10.1145/2347504

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 22 June 2011

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate27of53submissions,51%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader