(3.239.56.184) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/13 11:25
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:盧彥年
研究生(外文):Yen-NienLu
論文名稱:產品造形偏好對瞳孔變異量的影響之探究
論文名稱(外文):An Investigation into User’s Pupillary Variations in the Preferences for Product Forms
指導教授:何俊亨何俊亨引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chun-Heng Ho
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:工業設計學系
學門:設計學門
學類:產品設計學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2016
畢業學年度:104
語文別:英文
論文頁數:126
中文關鍵詞:瞳孔量測曲線偏好情感量測情感設計
外文關鍵詞:Pupillary MeasurementCurvature BiasAffective ComputingEmotional Design
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:114
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
市場上競爭產品之間,在技術的水準上不會相差太多,反而在美學和設計才是差異所在,也才是購買決策上決定性的因素。因此,了解人們對於產品美學賞析,在美學和消費相關領域方面的應用上是一個重要議題。在產品造形偏好原則中,有些除了與美學相關外,亦與本能反應有所關連,例如人們對於尖銳的物品會感到有威脅感,而偏好曲線造形。也就是說曲線偏好除了能透過美學了解人們偏好外,亦可能透過生理反應得知人們對於曲線造形的情感反應。因此,本研究使用生理資訊搭配心理量測驗證造形美學原則,透過瞳孔量測針對曲線偏好的原則進行驗證,以了解改變曲線程度對於情感激起的影響。
為達成本研究目的,本研究須先進行兩階段實驗。實驗一: 驗證瞳孔量測是否適用於產品評價上:比較觀看開瓶器與IAPS資料庫圖片(正向、中性、負向情緒)瞳孔反應有何異同;實驗二: 曲線偏好應用於未改變產品基本造形的情形:是否曲線程度與偏好亦呈現倒U趨勢,且是否會受到產品尺寸與設計背景與否所影響。
結果顯示,(1) 透過瞳孔量測可以分辨產品引發的負向情緒與其他情緒(正向與中性情緒)。由於一般產品所引發的情緒強度較弱,並且設計類產品並不能引發人們產生極端負向情緒,因此可以藉由瞳孔量測作為產品評價。(2) 產品基本型未改變的情形下,產品的偏好與產品造形曲線程度呈現倒U趨勢。並且產品尺寸會影響人們對於造形曲線程度的感受,對於較大產品造形上的曲線程度會感受到較實際曲線程度小,最終影響了偏好;由於具設計背景較不會受到曲線偏好影響,尤其是在偏好出現反轉後,因此設計背景者在偏好反折點之後下降的趨勢較非設計背景者來的劇烈。
在證明瞳孔變化量適合作為產品評價以及了解未改變產品基本型時曲線程度與偏好的關係後,最後使用瞳孔尺寸量測產品造形曲線偏好的變化,以了解改變曲線程度對於情感激起的影響。以四種產品搭配五種曲線程度的組合進行實驗,結果顯示,無論是瞳孔變化量或是主觀評價皆顯示,這些改變對於情感的激起並未有顯著性的差異。但由主觀的偏好評價可以得知,不同基本型的產品,改變曲線程度會有不同的效應。本研究結果可以作為系列性產品造形設計時參考,並建議設計師在次代產品設計時,能根據產品基本形,考慮調整造形的曲線程度,以增加消費者對於產品的喜愛,進而提升購買的意願。
Competing market products generally do not carry significant variations in their technological levels, but differ, rather, in their aesthetics and designs; these two factors are decisive elements in the buying decision process. Understanding the relationship between people and product aesthetic appreciation is thus a vital issue in applications regarding aesthetics and consumers. According to the principle of product shape preference, some principles are not only related to aesthetics, but also to human instinct. For instance, most people perceive a sense of threat from sharp objects, preferring curvilinear shapes instead. In other words, not only can curve preference be utilized to study human biases through aesthetics, it can also reveal people’s emotional responses to curvilinear shapes through biological reactions. Therefore, in this research, physiological data and psychological measurements were employed through experiments. The experiments studied correlations between pupillary measurements and curvature preference, all to demonstrate the principle of shape aesthetics and study the influences that altering curvature degrees may have on emotional arousal.
The research purpose was attained through two phases of experimentation: (1) To confirm whether pupil size variation can be suitably applied in product evaluations by comparing pupil response variations in observations of openers and IAPS database images (positive, neutral, or negative emotions); (2) To evaluate curvature preference in products (without altering their prototype shapes) by determining whether curvature degree and product preference exhibit an inverted-U trend and whether product size or design background can play influences on curvature preference.
The results of the experiment one indicate: Through pupil size measurement, negative and other emotional responses (neutral and positive) triggered by products can be distinguished. Because ordinary products trigger mild emotional arousal, and designer products do not trigger extremely negative emotions, pupillary measurements are thus reliable tools to conduct product evaluations. Results from the experiment two indicate: In conditions where a product’s prototype form remained unaltered, product preference and product curvature degree can indeed display an inverted-U curve, and that product size can influence how people perceive the degree of curvature. Curvature degree in larger product sizes correlates to smaller degrees of practical curvature, and ultimately influences preference. Moreover, due to design background tends to remain uninfluenced by curvature preference, especially after the peak of preference. Hence, a significant difference emerges after the peak of preference, where the preference of people with a design background declines more sharply than that of participants without a design background.
After having demonstrated that pupillary variations can suitably be applied toward product evaluation and having evaluated the correlation between curvature degree in products and preference levels (without prototype differences), the influence of altered curvature degrees on emotional arousal was lastly studied by utilizing pupillary sizes to measure variations in curvature preference for product shape. The study was facilitated through a combination of four different products and five different curvature degrees. Results indicate that variations in product form curvature do not have significant differences in arousal, regardless of pupil variations or subjective evaluations. Through subjective preference evaluation, however, one can determine the extent to which altering curvature degrees in products with varying basic shapes can carry different effects.
The results of this study may be utilized as a reference for product form design, as well as serve as advice for designers working on second-generation products to consider altering curvature degrees according to their products’ basic shapes, so as to increase consumer preference for the product and thus elevate the desire to purchase them.
摘要 i
ABSTRACT iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Measurement of feelings 2
1.2 Curvature bias 4
1.3 Pupil size and curvature preference 7
1.4 Theory structure 9
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.1 Psychological Measurement 11
2.1.1 Self-report Scales 11
2.1.2 The application of subjective reaction of research design 15
2.2 Physiological Measurement 15
2.2.1 Pupillary Response and Measurement technique 16
2.2.2 Summary 20
2.3 Emotional Stimuli 20
2.3.1 International Affective Picture System (IAPS) 21
2.3.2 Appreciation of Product Aesthetics 21
2.3.3 Curvature Bias 22
2.3.4 Prototypicality 23
2.3.5 Curvature Gradual Effect with no prototype differences 24
CHAPTER 3 USING PUPIL SIZE VARIATION FOR EVALUATING USERS' EMOTION ELICITED BY PRODUCTS 26
3.1 The Methodology of Experiment 1 26
3.1.1 Participants 26
3.1.2 Stimulus materials 27
3.1.3 Apparatus 27
3.1.4 Procedure 28
3.1.5 Signal processing and analysis 29
3.2 The Results of Experiment 1 29
3.3 Discussion 32
CHAPTER 4 THE INFLUENCE OF SIZE, CURVATURE, AND EXPERTISE ON AESTHETIC PREFERENCES FOR PRODUCT 35
4.1 The Methodology of Experiment 2 35
4.1.1 Participants 35
4.1.2 Apparatus and Stimuli 36
4.1.3 Procedure 37
4.2 The results of Experiment 2 38
4.3 Discussion 41
4.3.1 Preference and Difference size of Product 42
4.3.2 Expertise 43
4.4 General Discussion 45
CHAPTER 5 THE CORRELATION BETWEEN PUPIL SIZE VARIATION AND PRODUCT AESTHETIC APPRECIATION 46
5.1 The methodology of Experiment 3 46
5.1.1 Participants 47
5.1.2 Stimuli 47
5.1.3 Apparatus 48
5.1.4 Procedure 48
5.1.5 Signal processing and analysis 49
5.2 Results 49
5.3 Discussion 50
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION 52
6.1 Research limitations and future works 54
REFERENCES 56
Appendix A STIMULI OF EXPERIMENT 1 63
Appendix B DESCRIPTION OF DEFAULT SUBHEADING SCHEME 66
Appendix C 論文中文版 68
Aronoff, J., Woike, B. A., & Hyman, L. M. (1992). Which are the stimuli in facial displays of anger and happiness? Configurational bases of emotion recognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 1050.
Augustin, D., & Leder, H. (2006). Art expertise: a study of concepts and conceptual spaces. Psychology Science, 48(2), 135.
Bar, M., & Neta, M. (2006). Humans prefer curved visual objects. Psychological Science, 17(8), 645-648.
Bar, M., & Neta, M. (2007). Visual elements of subjective preference modulate amygdala activation. Neuropsychologia, 45(10), 2191-2200.
Beatty, J. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91(2), 276-292.
Beatty, J., & Kahneman, D. (1966). Pupillary changes in two memory tasks. Psychonomic Science, 5(10), 371-372.
Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation: Hemisphere.
Berntson, G., Cacioppo, J., & Quigley, K. (1993). Respiratory sinus arrhythmia: Autonomic origins, physiological mechanisms, and psychophysiological implications. Psychophysiology, 30, 183-183.
Bianchin, M., & Angrilli, A. (2012). Gender differences in emotional responses: A psychophysiological study. 105(4), 925-932. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.10.031
Blijlevens, J., Carbon, C.-C., Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2012). Aesthetic appraisal of product designs: Independent effects of typicality and arousal. British Journal of Psychology, 103(1), 44-57. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02038.x
Blijlevens, J., Mugge, R., Ye, P., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2013). The influence of product exposure on trendiness and aesthetic appraisal. International Journal of Design, 7(1), 55-67. doi:papers2://publication/uuid/C2E44FB9-308A-450C-87C4-61679374ADFC
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2007). The International Affective Picture System (IAPS) in the study of emotion and attention. Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment, 29-46.
Bradley, M. M., Miccoli, L., Escrig, M., & Lang, P. (2008). The pupil as a measure of emotional arousal and autonomic activation. Psychophysiology, 45(4), 602-607.
Carbon, C.-C. (2010). The cycle of preference: Long-term dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Acta Psychologica, 134(2), 233-244. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.004
Conway, C. A., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Little, A. C., & Sahraie, A. (2008). Transient pupil constrictions to faces are sensitive to orientation and species. Journal of Vision, 8(3). doi:10.1167/8.3.17.
Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., & Cutrell, E. (2001). Subjective duration assessment: An implicit probe for software usability. In (Ed.), (pp. 167¡V170). Citeseer.
Dazkir, S. S., & Read, M. A. (2012). Furniture forms and their influence on our emotional responses toward interior environments. Environment and Behavior, 44(5), 722-732.
Demirbilek, O., & Sener, B. (2003). Product design, semantics and emotional response. Ergonomics, 46(13-14), 1346-1360.
Desmet, P. M. A. (2003). Measuring emotions. Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment. Kluwer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Desmet, P. M. A., Overbeeke, K., & Tax, S. (2001). Designing products with added emotional value: development and application of an approach for research through design. The Design Journal, 4, 32-47.
Desmet, P. M. A., Porcelijn, R., & van Dijk, M. (2007). Emotional Design; Application of a Research-Based Design Approach. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 20(3), 141-155.
Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der aesthetik (Vol. 1): Breitkopf & Härtel.
Fenko, A., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Hekkert, P. (2010). Looking hot or feeling hot: What determines the product experience of warmth? Materials & Design, 31(3), 1325-1331. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2009.09.008
Girard, S., & Johnson, H. (2009). Developing affective educational software products: Sorémo, a new method for capturing emotional states. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 493-510. doi:10.1080/09544820903158827
Gordon, K. (1909). Esthetics. New York: Henry Holt.
Granholm, E., Asarnow, R. F., Sarkin, A. J., & Dykes, K. L. (1996). Pupillary responses index cognitive resource limitations. Psychophysiology, 33(4), 457-461.
Guthrie, G., & Wiener, M. (1966). Subliminal perception or perception of partial cue with pictorial stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(6), 619.
Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & Wieringen, P. C. (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.
Hess, E. H. (1965). Attitude and pupil size. Scientific American, 212(4), 46-54.
Hess, E. H., & Polt, J. (1960). Pupil size as related to interest value of visual stimuli. Science, 132(3423), 349-350.
Hsiao, K.-A., & Chen, L.-L. (2006). Fundamental dimensions of affective responses to product shapes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36(6), 553-564.
Hsu, S., Chuang, M., & Chang, C. (2000). A semantic differential study of designers' and users' product form perception. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 25(4), 375-391.
Huang, M. S., Tsai, H. C., & Huang, T. H. (2011). Applying Kansei engineering to industrial machinery trade show booth design. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 41(1), 72-78. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-78651377235&partnerID=40&md5=1043fa0b895b4481a4ffd6b824fdbb93
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.
Imamoglu, Ç. (2000). Complexity, liking and familiarity: architecture and non-architecture turkish students'assessments of traditional and modern house facades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(1), 5-16.
Ioannis Xenakis, A. A. (2014). Aesthetic perception and its minimal content: a naturalistic perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01038
Jacobsen, T., & Höfel, L. (2002). Aesthetic judgments of novel graphic patterns: Analyses of individual judgments. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95(3), 755-766.
Janisse, M. P. (1974). Pupil Size, Affect and Exposure Frequency. Social Behavior and personality, 2(2), 125-146. Retrieved from (Go to ISI)://A1974V080900003
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., & Nagamachi, M. (1995). Development of a design support system for office chairs using 3-D graphics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15(1), 49-62.
Johnson, M., Muday, J., & Schirillo, J. (2010). When viewing variations in paintings by Mondrian, aesthetic preferences correlate with pupil size. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(3), 161.
Keller, I., Sleeswijk Visser, F., van der Lugt, R., & Stappers, P. J. (2009). Collecting with Cabinet: or how designers organise visual material, researched through an experiential prototype. Design Studies, 30(1), 69-86. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.06.001
Kohn, M., & Clynes, M. (1969). Color dynamics of the pupil. 156(2), 931-950.
Kuchinke, L., Trapp, S., Jacobs, A., & Leder, H. (2009). Pupillary responses in art appreciation: Effects of aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 156-163.
Kuchinke, L., Vo, M., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. (2007). Pupillary responses during lexical decisions vary with word frequency but not emotional valence. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 65(2), 132-140.
Lang, P. J. (1980). Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: Computer applications. In J. H. J. J. B. Sidowski & T. A. Williams (Eds.), Technology in mental health care delivery systems (pp. 119–137). Norwood: NJ:Ablex.
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual.Technical Report A-8. Retrieved from
Lang, P. J., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M., & Hamm, A. O. (1993). Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions. Psychophysiology, 30(3), 261-273.
Laparra-Hernandez, J., Belda-Lois, J., Medina, E., Campos, N., & Poveda, R. (2009). EMG and GSR signals for evaluating user's perception of different types of ceramic flooring. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(2), 326-332.
Latto, R., Brain, D., & Kelly, B. (2000). An oblique effect in aesthetics: Homage to Mondrian (1872-1944). Perception, 29(8), 981-988.
Leach, L. S., Christensen, H., Mackinnon, A. J., Windsor, T. D., & Butterworth, P. (2008). Gender differences in depression and anxiety across the adult lifespan: the role of psychosocial mediators. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 43(12), 983-998.
Lebrecht, S., Bar, M., Barrett, L. F., & Tarr, M. J. (2012). Micro-valences: perceiving affective valence in everyday objects. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 107. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00107
Leder, H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2005). Dimensions in appreciation of car interior design. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(5), 603-618. doi:10.1002/acp.1088
Leder, H., Tinio, P. P. L., & Bar, M. (2011). Emotional valence modulates the preference for curved objects. Perception, 40(6), 649-655. doi:10.1068/p6845
Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2010). Contour Bias (pp. 62-63).
Lithari, C., Frantzidis, C. A., Papadelis, C., Vivas, A. B., Klados, M. A., Kourtidou-Papadeli, C., . . . Bamidis, P. D. (2009). Are Females More Responsive to Emotional Stimuli? A Neurophysiological Study Across Arousal and Valence Dimensions. 23(1), 27-40. doi:10.1007/s10548-009-0130-5
Liu, Y. (2003). Engineering aesthetics and aesthetic ergonomics: theoretical foundations and a dual-process research methodology. Ergonomics, 46(13-14), 1273-1292.
Loewy, R. (1951). Never Leave Well Enough Alone: The Personal Record of an Industrial Designer from Lipsticks to Locomotives. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Mauss, I., & Robinson, M. (2009). Measures of emotion: A review. Cognition & Emotion, 23(2), 209-237. doi:10.1080/02699930802204677
McManus, I. C., & Weatherby, P. (1997). The golden section and the aesthetics of form and composition: a cognitive model. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(2), 209-232.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
Miller, E. A. (1972). Interaction of vision and touch in conflict and nonconflict form perception tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96(1), 114.
Miller, R. L. (1967). The clinical validation of the pupillary response: the effect of chromatic and achromatic stimuli upon pupil responsivity. (Doctoral Dissertation), Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Mudd, S., Conway, C., & Schindler, D. (1990). The eye as music critic: Pupil response and verbal preferences. Studia Psychologica, 32(1-2), 23-30.
Nagai, Y., & Georgiev, G. V. (2011). The role of impressions on users' tactile interaction with product materials: An analysis of associative concept networks. Materials & Design, 32(1), 291-302. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2010.05.040
Nagamachi, M. (2002). Kansei engineering as a powerful consumer-oriented technology for product development. 33(3), 289-294.
Nielsen, J., & Levy, J. (1994). Measuring usability preference vs. performance. Communications of the ACM, 37(4), 66-75.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2001). Gender differences in depression (Vol. 10): SAGE Publications.
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things: Basic Civitas Books.
Nuthmann, A., & Van Der Meer, E. (2005). Time's arrow and pupillary response. Psychophysiology, 42(3), 306-317.
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning (Vol. 47): University of Illinois Press.
Palmer, S. E., Schloss, K. B., & Sammartino, J. (2013). Visual Aesthetics and Human Preference. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 77-107. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100504
Partala, T., Jokiniemi, M., & Surakka, V. (2000). Pupillary responses to emotionally provocative stimuli. In (Ed.), (pp. 123-129). New York: ACM.
Partala, T., & Surakka, V. (2003). Pupil size variation as an indication of affective processing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(1-2), 185-198.
Powell, W. R., & Schirillo, J. A. (2011). Hemispheric laterality measured in Rembrandt's portraits using pupil diameter and aesthetic verbal judgements. Cognition & Emotion, 25(5), 868-885. doi:10.1080/02699931.2010.515709
Purkis, H. M., Lipp, O. V., Edwards, M. S., & Barnes, R. (2009). An increase in stimulus arousal has differential effects on the processing speed of pleasant and unpleasant stimuli. Motivation and Emotion, 33(4), 353-361. doi:10.1007/s11031-009-9144-2
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364.
Regueiro, R., & G León, O. (2003). Estrés en decisiones cotidianas. Psicothema, 15(4), 533-538.
Rock, I., & Victor, J. (1964). Vision and touch: An experimentally created conflict between the two senses. Science, 143 (3606), 594-596
Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Desmet, P. M. A. (2007). The effects of sensory impairments on product experience and personal well-being. Ergonomics, 50(12), 2026-2048.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: PA: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
Sharp, C., van Goozen, S., & Goodyer, I. (2006). Children's subjective emotional reactivity to affective pictures: gender differences and their antisocial correlates in an unselected sample of 7-11-year-olds. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(2), 143-150. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01464.x
Silvera, D. H., Josephs, R. A., & Giesler, R. B. (2002). Bigger is better: The influence of physical size on aesthetic preference judgments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(3), 189-202.
Silvia, P. J., & Barona, C. M. (2009). Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27(1), 25-42.
Steinhauer, S., Boller, F., Zubin, J., & Pearlman, S. (1983). Pupillary dilation to emotional visual stimuli revisited. Psychophysiology, 20, 472.
Thomsen, D. K., Mehlsen, M. Y., Viidik, A., Sommerlund, B., & Zachariae, R. (2005). Age and gender differences in negative affect—Is there a role for emotion regulation? Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1935-1946.
Tinio, P. P., & Leder, H. (2009). Just how stable are stable aesthetic features? Symmetry, complexity, and the jaws of massive familiarization. Acta Psychologica, 130(3), 241-250.
Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., Fich, L. B., Leder, H., Modrono, C., . . . Skov, M. (2013). Impact of contour on aesthetic judgments and approach-avoidance decisions in architecture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement_2), 10446-10453. doi:10.1073/pnas.1301227110
Vo, M., Jacobs, A., Kuchinke, L., Hofmann, M., Conrad, M., Schacht, A., & Hutzler, F. (2008). The coupling of emotion and cognition in the eye: Introducing the pupil old/new effect. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 130-140.
Westerman, S. J., Gardner, P. H., Sutherland, E. J., White, T., Jordan, K., Watts, D., & Wells, S. (2012). Product Design: Preference for Rounded versus Angular Design Elements. Psychology and Marketing, 29(8), 595-605. doi:10.1002/mar.20546
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關論文
 
無相關期刊
 
無相關點閱論文
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔