Evaluating designer’s Kansei evolution by drawing analysis
LEVY Pierre*, LEE Seunghee*, YAMANAKA Toshimasa**University of Tsukuba, Comprehensive Human Sciences Graduate SchoolThe global objective is to propose an approach in Kansei
Information for product design evaluation. We propose here todevelop a method to follow designer's Kansei during the wholeprocess of product design and to present a pilot experiment.
1.

Results

8 subjects had been interviewed 4 times on a four-monthproject, providing a total of 154 drawings.

ProblematicDuring the design process, the product is evolving, as well as
designers' feelings toward their on-process creation.
Nevertheless, designer’s Kansei is highly used during theideation process, whereas following steps are based on Chisei
and can constraint, or even go against Kansei's propositions
made during the ideation.
When a company understands the importance of Kansei, andwishes to input a maximum of it into the final product, it isimportant to be able to evaluate the evolution of Kansei input
during the design process, and thus to be able to correct thedesign when required. We propose hereby a method forevaluating designers' Kansei evolution during the designprocess.
2.

3.

MethodInstead of trying to evaluate directly designers’ feelinginvolved into the project, we propose to evaluate the evolutionof designers’ feeling concerning the project (as an overview). It
would provide same information, but it is easier to measure.
Thus, we organize experiment to evaluate designers’ feelingconcerning the project, and intend to measure the possible
evolution during the going on of the project.
Regularly, designers involved in the process are asked to draw.
The aim of this interview is to evaluate the feeling of each
designer toward the project [1]. The experiment conditions areconstant: same place (preferably a familiar one), mood infusion
techniques are used to stabilize the subject’s mood [2]…
The experimental protocol is as follow: designers are asked todraw image icons for a fixed time (no limitation on the drawingtools). Drawings are done one five different blank papers,
aiming at answering the five following sentences:•䝛䝱䜼䜫䜳䝌䛴⥪మⓏ䛰វ᝗䛱㛭䛟䜑䜨䝥䞀䜼䜦䜨䜷䝷㻃㻋㻪㼏㼒㼅㼄㼏㻃㼉㼈㼈㼏㼌㼑㼊㻃㼆㼒㼑㼆㼈㼕㼑㼌㼑㼊㻃㼗㼋㼈㻃㼓㼕㼒㼍㼈㼆㼗㻃㼅㼜㻃㼌㼐㼄㼊㼈㻃㼌㼆㼒㼑㼖㻌㻃•䝛䝱䜼䜫䜳䝌䛴⥪మⓏ䛰វ᝗䛱㛭䛟䜑䜯䝭䞀䝕䝑䝯㻃㻋㻪㼏㼒㼅㼄㼏㻃㼉㼈㼈㼏㼌㼑㼊㻃㼆㼒㼑㼆㼈㼕㼑㼌㼑㼊㻃㼗㼋㼈㻃㼓㼕㼒㼍㼈㼆㼗㻃㼅㼜㻃㼆㼒㼏㼒㼕㻃㼓㼄㼑㼈㼏㻌㻃•䝛䝱䜼䜫䜳䝌䛴஢ῼ䛱㛭䛟䜑䜨䝥䞀䜼䜦䜨䜷䝷㻃㻋㻨㼛㼓㼈㼆㼗㼄㼗㼌㼒㼑㼖㻃㼆㼒㼑㼆㼈㼕㼑㼌㼑㼊㻃㼗㼋㼈㻃㼓㼕㼒㼍㼈㼆㼗㻃㼅㼜㻃㼌㼐㼄㼊㼈㻃㼌㼆㼒㼑㼖㻌㻃•䝛䝱䜼䜫䜳䝌䛴஢ῼ䛱㛭䛟䜑䜯䝭䞀䝕䝑䝯㻃㻋㻨㼛㼓㼈㼆㼗㼄㼗㼌㼒㼑㼖㻃㼆㼒㼑㼆㼈㼕㼑㼌㼑㼊㻃㼗㼋㼈㻃㼓㼕㼒㼍㼈㼆㼗㻃㼅㼜㻃㼆㼒㼏㼒㼕㻃㼓㼄㼑㼈㼏㻌㻃•௑䛴វ᝗㻃㻋㻷㼒㼇㼄㼜䇲㼖㻃㼉㼈㼈㼏㼌㼑㼊㻌㻃The results are evaluated by both quantitative and subjectivetechniques. Quantitative techniques are statistical analyses on
the numerical data output from the drawings. Subjectivetechniques are realized by expert people (psychologist anddesigners) and mainly based on categorization of the drawing.
Quantitative and subjective techniques are finally compared,expecting to find highly correlative results. This would allow
us to propose a quantitative method to evaluate designer’sKansei evolution in the design process.

Figure 1: Examples of drawings
Among a non-exhaustive 14 quantitative tool list, we decided
to start using the Physical Quantity Analysis for Similarity ofPatterns, since it was a relevant one used in previous works by
Lee [3]. All the drawings were analyzed, giving 162
information per drawing. Thanks to this information, thedrawings were divided into 7 clusters. Expert people createdgroups according to the feeling they thought the drawings wereexpressing. Finally correlation analysis was done between thesubjective (expert) groups and the quantitative clusters(7!=5040 comparisons) for each expert. The highest correlation
coefficient obtained was surprisingly low: 0.3.
4.

Conclusion

It is obvious that the correlation is too low to consider this tool
as relevant in this study. The 13 other tools have to be tested
the same way in order to find at least a relevant one for the
purpose of this paper.
Once some tools will be selected, we will be able to use theentitlement of the groups done by the expert (based on theirfeeling) to give a meaning to the clusters calculated by statisticanalysis. Then the target will be reach: a tool capable toanalyze objectively the evolution of the designer’s Kansei
during a project.
5.

Main references

1.
S.H. Lee and A. Harada. A Mutual Supported Design
Approach by Objective and Subjective Evaluation of Kansei
Information. in 3rd Asian Design Conference. 1998. Taipei,China.
2.
E. Eich, et al., Cognition and Emotion, ed. M.
Marschark. 2000, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
259.
3S.H. Lee, T. Kato and A. Harada. Kansei Evaluationof Subjective Image by Iconic Abstraction. In 2nd Asia Design
Conference International Symposium on Design Sciences,
1997 (Best paper).

Emails: levy@kansei.tsukuba.ac.jp; lee@kansei.tsukuba.ac.jp; tyam@kansei.tsukuba.ac.jp