Design Management and Professional Practice: Framework of Emotional Dimensions

VOLUME 13 ISSUE 3
Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

The International Journal of
Design Management
and Professional Practice
_________________________________________________________________________
Framework of Emotional Dimensions

Definitions, Theories, and Measuring Tools for Design
AINOA ABELLA GARCIA, LAURA CLÈRIES GARCIA, AND LLUÍS MARCO-ALMAGRO
DESIGNPRINCIPLESANDPRACTICES.COM
EDITORS
Lorenzo Imbesi, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
Loredana Di Lucchio, University of Rome, Italy
ACTING DIRECTOR OF PUBLISHING

Jeremy Boehme, Common Ground Research Networks, USA
MANAGING EDITOR
Helen Repp, Common Ground Research Networks, USA

ADVISORY BOARD
The Design Principles and Practices Research Network recognizes
the contribution of many in the evolution of the Research Network.
The principal role of the Advisory Board has been, and is, to drive
the overall intellectual direction of the Research Network.
A full list of members can be found at
https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/about/advisory-board.
PEER REVIEW
Articles published in The International Journal of Design Management
and Professional Practice are peer reviewed using a two-way
anonymous peer review model. Reviewers are active participants of the
Design Principles and Practices Research Network or a thematically
related Research Network. The publisher, editors, reviewers, and
authors all agree upon the following standards of expected ethical
behavior, which are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) Core Practices. More information can be found at:
https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/journals/model.
ARTICLE SUBMISSION
The International Journal of Design Management and Professional
Practice publishes quarterly (March, June, September, December).
To find out more about the submission process, please visit
https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/journals/call-for-papers.
ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING

For a full list of databases in which this journal is indexed, please visit
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DESIGN https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/journals/collection.
MANAGEMENT AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
http://designprinciplesandpractices.com
RESEARCH NETWORK MEMBERSHIP
ISSN: 2325-162X (Print)
Authors in The International Journal of Design Management and
ISSN: 2325-1638 (Online)
Professional Practice are members of the Design Principles and
https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-162X/CGP (Journal)
Practices Journal Collection or a thematically related Research
Network. Members receive access to journal content.
First published by Common Ground Research Networks in 2020
To find out more, visit
University of Illinois Research Park
https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/about/become-a-member.
2001 South First Street, Suite 202
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
Ph: +1-217-328-0405
SUBSCRIPTIONS
The International Journal of Design Management and Professional
http://cgnetworks.org
Practice is available in electronic and print formats. Subscribe to gain
access to content from the current year and the entire backlist.
The International Journal of Design Management
Contact us at cgscholar.com/cg_support.
and Professional Practice is a peer-reviewed, scholarly journal.
ORDERING
COPYRIGHT
Single articles and issues are available from the journal bookstore at
© 2020 (individual papers), the author(s)
https://cgscholar.com/bookstore.
© 2020 (selection and editorial matter),
Common Ground Research Networks
HYBRID OPEN ACCESS
All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, The International Journal of Design Management and Professional
research, criticism, or review, as permitted under the applicable Practice is Hybrid Open Access, meaning authors can choose to make
copyright legislation, no part of this work may be reproduced by any their articles open access. This allows their work to reach an even
process without written permission from the publisher. For permissions wider audience, broadening the dissemination of their research. To find
and other inquiries, please contact cgscholar.com/cg_support. out more, please visit
https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/journals/hybrid-open-access.
DISCLAIMER
The authors, editors, and publisher will not accept any legal
responsibility for any errors or omissions that may have been made in
this publication. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied,
with respect to the material contained herein.
Common Ground Research Networks, a member of Crossref
Framework of Emotional Dimensions: Definitions,
Theories, and Measuring Tools for Design
Ainoa Abella Garcia, 1 Elisava Barcelona School of Design and Engineering, Spain
Laura Clèries Garcia, Elisava Barcelona School of Design and Engineering, Spain
Lluís Marco-Almagro, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTech, Spain
Abstract: Emotional dimensions have been dealt with in various disciplines for their transdisciplinary implication, and,
therefore, complexity. These circumstances have led to a situation in which there is confusion and a lack of consensus
about these emotional dimensions and their respective definitions. The aim of this article is therefore to analyze and
classify emotional dimensions by collecting information from different disciplines through a systematic literature review
methodology. The result is the creation of a common language and framework of definitions and theories, allowing the
evaluation of strengths and opportunities for application and innovation, especially in the field of engineering and

design. Five emotional dimensions have been identified and defined—sensation, perception, emotion, feeling, and
affect—and have been correlated with specific measurement tools from various disciplines. This article ends by
proposing an emotional path and a procedure for action based on the needs and objectives of the study.
Keywords: Emotional Systematization, Transdisciplinary Theories, Measuring Tools, Updating Engineering Design
Introduction
H uman needs follow a hierarchy such that once fundamental needs are met, higher level
needs must be fulfilled (van Gorp and Adams 2012). As indicated by Sanders (1992) and
Jordan (2000), consumer needs for products are as follows:
 Level 1: Functionality. The product solves a problem and has a function.
 Level 2: Usability. The product is safe, easy to use, and comfortable.
 Level 3: Pleasure. The product provides emotional benefits.
This hierarchy can be contemplated and applied in design engineering processes in order to
develop better, new products, allowing, on the one hand, the differentiation of the product in the
market (Straker and Wrigley 2015) thanks to the application of the scientific basis of emotions in
design and extrapolating results from studies; and, on the other hand, creating a stronger
connection with the user (Ho and Siu 2010).
According to Yoon, Polhmeyer, and Desmet (2016), understanding the user’s emotions is
relevant for design as it responds to one of the highest consumer needs. Current design is moving
toward the integration of emotional values in the same products, as indicated by Krippendorff
(2006). In order to integrate these values, multidisciplinary teams are needed in which
participants contribute with their vision to create a final integrated and holistic idea. At this stage
of teamwork, confusion can appear due to the vocabulary and language in each field since
emotions are present in a transdisciplinary manner, as noted by Scherer (2005). The goal in this
article is to unite the disparate theories and tools into corresponding dimensions to help establish
a taxonomy and, simultaneously, reaffirm the intention of the designers.
Taxonomies that can be consulted at present—some of them are referred to in the specific
dimensions—have been made for the comprehension of and to aid in classifying, in a consensual
manner, the number and nature of emotions. The vast majority of taxonomies come from
psychology, as indicated by Panksepp (2004), with the idea of being open to new changes thanks
to scientific advances and new knowledge about the mind. After researching and analyzing the
1
Corresponding Author: Ainoa Abella Garcia, La Rambla 30-32, ELISAVA Research, ELISAVA Barcelona School of
Design and Engineering, Barcelona, 08011, Spain. email: aabella@elisava.net
The International Journal of Design Management and Professional Practice

Volume 13, Issue 3, 2020, https://designprinciplesandpractices.com
© Common Ground Research Networks, Ainoa Abella Garcia, Laura Clèries Garcia,
Lluís Marco-Almagro All Rights Reserved. Permissions: cgscholar.com/cg_support
ISSN: 2325-162X (Print), ISSN: 2325-1638 (Online)
https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-162X/CGP/v13i03/13-29 (Article)
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DESIGN MANAGEMENT AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
various taxonomies put forth by engineering and design, an opportunity for the development of
theories and measuring tools to approach emotional dimensions was found. This opportunity
arose from lack of consensus regarding the language and the classification of emotions due to
their complexity, as well as their transdisciplinary nature.
This article aims to promote the integration of emotions during any stage of the design
process by establishing a common taxonomy that allows better communication, as well as
providing resources and tools to reaffirm the intention of the designers. The taxonomy has been
obtained as a result of the analysis and classification of a systematic review of the subject from
2008 to 2018. To help read the article, it has been structured as follows:
 Literature research methodology: systematic review: this section explains in detail
how the systematic review (process and results) has been developed.
 Research study: terminology and measuring tools: as a result of the systematic
review, some articles have been chosen and read completely in order to detect the

terminology and measurement tools they present and propose a common
classification. The results of this section are the five emotional dimensions,
presented in order and following the same structure (definition, theories and
reference authors, and measurement tools).
 Analysis: toward a new emotional systematization: the main conclusions of the
article are presented (synthesis of the emotional dimensions and the main reference
authors located in these dimensions).
Literature Research Methodology: Systematic Review

The method used in this article is a literature review, and more specifically, a systematic review
because it not only focuses on emotion and design but also aims to answer specific questions. In
this case, the main research question is: what are the relevant definitions, theories, and measuring
methods that focus on the emotional dimension of design?
To be able to answer this question, a search has been performed through a systematic review
in two electronic databases—Web of Science and Scopus—during the period from 2008 to 2018.
The studies that address emotions have been included from different disciplines, methods, and
measurement tools; and the works related to psychiatry, management of emotions, or emotional
disorders have been excluded.
The combinations of keywords used come from the breakdown of the specific question
“what are the relevant definitions, theories, and measuring methods that focus on the emotional
dimensions of design?” They are: Emotion + Design, Emotion + Theories, Emotion + Tool. The
review process has been performed under the established stages for a systematic review (see
Figure 1). First, the keywords and their combinations are searched for in the two databases.
Second, a selection of articles is predetermined by title. Third, selection and discard are based on
the keywords in the article and the revision of the abstract. Fourth and final, there is a
performance of the complete reading of the shortlisted articles. Once the search strategy
described has been completed, the articles that are repeated are excluded. In addition, in the case
of the Web of Science database, there is an intermediate phase between the word combinations
and the selection by title, since the system allows making a first exclusion by thematic areas
without any relation.
14
ABELLA GARCIA ET AL.: FRAMEWORK OF EMOTIONAL DIMENSIONS

Figure 1: S ystematic Review Process
Source: Abella Garcia, Clèries, and Marco-Almagro 2019
Figure 1 provides a global vision of the total number of articles in each step of the systematic
literature review. A considerable number of articles per combination of keywords in the same
process have been found. In Emotion + Design, the results in the initial part are 5,399; after area
inclusion and exclusion 1,990; selected by title 234, and finally 88, taking into account the
abstract. In Emotion + Theories, the results presented in the same order are 2,640, 870, 99, and
42; and for Emotion + Tools, 1,548, 937, 106, and 38.
The detection and gathering of the keywords referring to emotions that were most repeated,
the authors and theories, as well as the measurement tools have been undertaken through the
process of reading the complete articles. All this information has been synthesized and
summarized by article, thus allowing the content of the article to be understood quickly, in
keyword format. These keywords and reference of the article have been introduced and combined
in an Excel sheet, allowing an analysis—frequency and clustering—of the words, concluding
with five different emotional dimensions. Depending on these dimensions, each author, theory,
and measurement tool has been located into each emotional dimension, taking into account
coherence and the relationship with the content.
Due to the need to organize and understand what relationship there is and which differences
certain relationships present compared to others, a division into five different dimensions has
been proposed. This way of organizing the dimensions makes it possible to help professionals,
especially in engineering and design, to understand and attain this knowledge. These five
dimensions are: sensation, perception, emotion, feeling, and affect. These dimensions are all
presented below and follow a similar structure: first a definition of the word is given, then the
theories to which they refer are shown with their corresponding authors of reference, ending with
the current measuring tools available.
15
Research Study: Terminology and Measuring Tools

From the various disciplines that actively participated in the definition and understanding of
emotions, a research and mapping has been carried out of the definitions on the following
dimensions: sensation, perception, emotion, feeling, and affect. The various measuring and
quantification tools that can be applied to each dimension to extract data that could be relevant to
design are also given.
Sensation
Sensation means detecting or reacting to a stimulus. The senses collect data that are presented in
the mind; sensory thresholds are the limits when this is done (Bisquerra 2016). Sensations are the

sensory experiences people have that come before perception.
The rendering by Dr. Wilder Graves Penfield, the Sensory Homunculus (Boundless 2016), is
a map showing the involvement of the various organs in the brain dedicated to detecting external
stimuli. In this rendering, one can see that the hands, lips, and face have larger sizes, meaning
that they have greater sensitivity in processing and understanding the information they gather. At
the same time, the graph (Boundless 2016) also represents a multi-sensory or multi-channel view
of sensations. The same perspective has been followed up by other authors, such as Pierre Lévy
(2013), in which holistic or integral sensoriality with the user is presented.
The multi-sensoriality approach has left aside other ideas that delimited experiences
resulting from a single sensory channel, as indicated by Bandini Buti et al. (2010). Therefore,
according to Pagliarini (2002), it is in the accordance with this multi-sensory nature that people
have the ability to identify products that are designed with this same objective, which should
intrinsically integrate this sensory assessment. In order to make a proper interpretation of these
sensory attributes, instrumental measurements are necessary, which go beyond more technical
parameters.
The study and research of the tools, in terms of the parameters they analyze and which
senses are worked on, has been expanded upon. Presently, there are repertoires in which
classifications appear, such as those proposed by The Design & Emotion Society (Gorno 2012):
tools to measure the emotional reaction to products, tools to represent/explore information, tools
and methods to define product characteristics, tools to measure sensory characteristics, tools to
measure the expressions/meaning of products, and tools to collect information. As a result of this
research, a number of tools are mentioned, some of which are devices and others software, which
help to understand users through the senses. They are presented ordered by senses, starting with
hearing, in which one can find: SoundBe (Dal Palù et al. 2014), Diapasons (Laughlin 2008),
Decibel Meter, and Voice-Gesture Sketching Tool (Bencina, Wilde, and Langley 2008). For
taste, electronic tongue and a flavor wheel (also shared with the sense of smell). For smell, the
Sensory Box Explorer (Centro Studi Assaggiatori 2012) and the electronic nose (Mottram and
Elmore 2003). For touch, Touchfeel (van Laack 2014) and BioTac (Ros 2015). Finally, for sight,
the Pantone scale (Pantone 2017), NCS Gloss Scale (NCS Colour 2018a), NCS Lightness Meter
(NCS Colour 2018b), and Spectrophotometer (CRAIC Technologies 2018). Tools that work in a
multi-sensory manner are: Revel (Bau and Poupyrev 2012), Eye Tracking (Eyetracking 2011),
PrEmo (Lokman, Ishak, and Hadiana 2013), The Observer XT (Noldus 2018b), EEG (Zheng,
Dong, and Lu 2014), and Face Reader (Noldus 2018a).
As explained above, there are physiological measuring tools to collect one-way data and
others that work multi-sensorally. As Oliver (2017) points out, the important thing when working
with tools that gather data is sensing only certain parameters, in a controlled manner and without
reaching a figure that is too high, in addition to understanding the context in which it is being
measured.
16

Figure 2: Relationship between the Different Physiological Measuring Tools and the Senses
Figure 2 gives a visual representation of some of the tools and techniques that are currently on
the market and/or being used in research departments. Relating a sense with a measuring tool
makes it possible to understand which parameter or tool will be appropriate based on needs and
objectives. It is understood that the tools that are present, in more than one sense, are multi-
channel and the others are present in a single sensory channel.
Perception
Perceiving involves registering a stimulus, interpreting it, and giving it meaning (Saéz 2012).
There is no perception without sensation first, but the sensation does not completely determine
the perception. Perceiving is remembering, as it relies on known or learned experiences and,
therefore, there is a recognition (RAE 2018; Lexico 2019; Abella Garcia et al. 2019). The
complexity of perception is really the intrinsic multidimensional nature combined with a
subjective attitude (Bisquerra 2016).
Germark (2013) defines the evaluation of the perceptive dimension of products in a series of
methods and tools to measure how the consumer perceives the sensory characteristics of different
products in qualitative and quantitative terms, that is to say, by means of soft metrology.
According to Lerma and Dal Palù (2016), metrology is defined as the set of techniques and
measuring tools that aim to quantify and determine certain properties through human perception.
Examples of these graphic tools for evaluation include those based on Russell’s circumplex
model (1980), Wundt’s dimensions of feelings (1912), and the Differential Emotions Scale (Izard
1992).
Russell’s circumplex model (Posner, Russell, and Peterson 2005) proposes a model in which
emotions are distributed in a two-dimensional circle. The two dimensions are arousal—
represented in the vertical axis—which is the level of physiological stimulation; and valence—
represented in the horizontal axis—which is formed by mental judgments about the value of
things, and which at the same time is influenced by the experiences of pain and pleasure. The
17
center of the circle represents a neutral point with respect to these two dimensions. Therefore, it
can be represented at the level that is considered appropriate. This model has been used as a test
for facial expressions, affective states, and emotion words.
Izard’s Differential Emotion Scale is a standardized instrument created to classify and divide
the experience of the user’s emotion, in valid and discrete categories of emotion, as indicated by
The Design & Emotion Society definition (2017).
According to Ekman’s definition (2016), Wundt’s dimensions of feeling is a proposal to
describe emotions in a three-dimensional vector: pleasurable versus unpleasurable, arousing or
subduing, and strain or relaxation.
These perceptual evaluation tools, inspired and based on those referred to above, are
classified in this dimension, as they imply a process of understanding and placing this stimulus in
order to give it meaning.

Emotion
An emotion is a mental state, therefore occurring in the nervous system, which is spontaneous
and short-lived; it can vary from seconds to minutes, according to Desmet (2003). It is an
involuntary impulse responding to stimuli from the environment that causes either a positive or a
negative psychological response. Stimuli can be a current, past, or future event; real or
imaginary; conscious or unconscious; as emotion does not distinguish between reality and
fiction. According to Bisquerra (2016), the emotional response that is produced has a triple
action—neurophysiological, behavioral, and cognitive—and at the same time predisposes to an
action. This statement can be associated with the triune brain—closely related to the body— of
McLean and spread by Goleman (Panksepp 1998) to provide feedback on emotions. The three
brains are the reptilian, involved in neurophysiological actions; the limbic, associated with
behavior; and the neocortex associated with cognition.
Emotions are biologically innate, universal to all humans, and can be shown through facial
responses according to Tomkins (2009), or facial expressions according to Ekman, Friesen and
Ellsworth (1972). All emotions have a function, which is to help us adapt to the context as
defined by Bisquerra (2016) and are important for regulating life according to Ekman (2004).
Emotions are an essential survival tool, as indicated by Walter (2011), which is why many
species other than human beings have emotions.
There is no classification of good and bad emotions: all emotions are good. The issue is what
to do with them. Emotions need attention and affect the memory according to Reeves and Nass
(1998). The intensity of an emotion is connected to the clarity and strength with which it is
remembered. The same attention is not assigned depending on whether they are good or bad
experiences. Some studies by Reeves and Nass (1998) have shown that negative experiences tend
to demand much more attention, which, in the long term, implies that they are remembered more
easily.
At this point, it is worth highlighting the aesthetic emotions defined by Bisquerra (2016):
these emotional responses arise from contemplating works of art and artistic creations. This is
interesting, since classifications are considered a separate group, and it implies that they should
be present when designing.
Design and engineering are putting the focus on emotions and how to strengthen and work
on them. Various theories and methodologies have arisen from emotions for designing products
and/or services, such as:
18
 Designing for Emotions by Aarron Walter (2011): this proposes a pyramidal structure
that products must follow to fully meet people’s needs. Products must first be
functional. Once they have passed the first level, products must be reliable for easy use
later on, then agreeable and pleasant at the final level. The author considers that many
products lack the last point at present and therefore emphasizes the importance of
designing for users’ emotions as this will lead to a more positive user experience.
 “Faces of Product Pleasure” (Desmet 2012): the results of the different studies that
analyze the emotions of product interaction with the user have determined twenty-five
positive emotions.
 “A Framework for Empathy in Design” by Kouprie and Visser (2009): Some of the
pioneering universities in design, such as the Parsons School (The New School 2017),
are teaching their students and, thus, future professionals how to approach the emotional

needs of users through methodologies that work on empathy.
 Emotion-driven design approach (Ozkaramanli and Desmet 2012): holistic
understanding of positive emotional experiences to apply to design.
 Framework in which negative emotions can be pleasant (Fokkinga and Desmet 2013):
how to transform negative emotions into an enjoyable experience and not the opposite.
 Levels of emotional proceedings (Norman 2004): this analyzes the experience of
consumption and how all designs have a personality and, therefore, send an emotional
signal. This is related to the levels of emotional processing: the visceral level, the
behavioral level, and the reflective level. The visceral level transforms sensory
information to obtain feedback from the behavioral level and the reflective level is
responsible for keeping it over time.
 Emotional well-being: this uses emotions as a means to contribute to the well-being of
people who buy and use various products. Desmet and Pohlmeyer (2013) propose a
framework including twenty strategies to design for subjective well-being.
 Positive Design by Desmet (2013); “Embodied Typology of Positive Emotions: The
Development of a Tool to Facilitate Emotional Granularity in Design” by Yoon, Desmet
and Pohlmeyer (2013); “Design for Happiness” by Lakhotia (2011); and “Positive
Affect” by Miller (2011): theories focusing on how to design based on what makes
people feel good and happy, with a positive connotation. In this field, tools with
different styles that serve as an inspiration and/or measure of these emotions can be
found, such as the interactive database (Scarpellini (2013), which includes hundreds of
examples; and an instrument for measuring the impact of happiness in design developed
by Kamp and Desmet (2014).
 Ozkaramanli, Desmet and Hekkert (2012) indicate the importance emotions have when
it comes to making decisions. They note that influencing emotions can end up affecting
the process of making decisions or resolutions. The emotional behavior of the consumer
synthesizes as key words all the studies that talk about emotions-decisions-consumption.
 Five ways to design for emotions (van Hout 2015): van Hout proposes several ways for
understanding, measuring, and encouraging emotional impact design in the context of
products, services, and systems.
 There are three types of user benefits according to Jordan (2000): hedonic, practical, and
emotional. If the benefits in the emotional field are divided according to the
classification by van Gorp and Adams (2012), one can observe that there is a hierarchy,
beginning with emotional responses, followed by emotional experiences, and ending
with emotional relationships. van Gorp and Adams worked together on the tendency
that people have in seeing personality in objects and forming relationships with these
products.
19
 Emotionally durable design (Chapman 2015) proposes a vision focused on using

emotions to promote a relationship of affection and attachment of users to their
respective products.
Although there is currently a great step forward in developing software and apps that measure
emotions, through biometric-based multimethod tools (Lasa et al. 2017) or biofeedback (Li et al.
2016; Choi et al. 2017), this section does not explain which tools and/or techniques exist to
measure emotions, for two reasons: first, because emotions, understood as mental states,
depending on the aforementioned theories that may be used or understood, will have different
forms. In other words, designing for joy will be different than for fear and finding resources that
facilitate creating generic guidelines is complex. Second, emotions are completely related to the
context. As a result of this involuntary act, it has different ways of presenting itself
neurologically, behaviorally, and cognitively, culminating in an action. Understanding the action

and at the same time trying to measure this involuntary impulse with its response modes is a
great challenge.
Feeling
Feeling is emotion made conscious. The cognitive component comes into play in this part.
Specifically, the perception of an emotion would be the feeling. Feelings are the mind’s
representation for indicating what has changed in the organism (Ekman 2004). Using these
models leads the mind to ignore certain aspects of the body when they are necessary for survival.
For example, it may be useful for the mind to ignore painful experiences to the body when the
pressing need is to escape from danger, as indicated by Damasio (1994). Feelings are
intentionally directed toward something and involve the person-object relationship (Frijda 1994).
They constitute people’s likings as well as their attitudes and norms.
One of the most used tools at present, especially in the industrial context, is Kansei
engineering. It was founded by Mitsuo Nagamachi (Nagamachi and Lokman 2003) with the aim
of developing or improving products and services through transferring the needs and feelings of
consumers to the domain of design thanks to the different parameters of the product. Later, other
authors participated in the definition and/or use of it thanks to their contributions, such as
Schütte, Eklund and Ishihara (Schüttle 2002; Schütte et al. 2004; Schütte et al. 2007) with the
Principles of Kansei Engineering.
The studies of Kansei Engineering (KE) usually consist of both qualitative and quantitative
research methods. Lokman (2010) places emphasis on understanding the different types of KE.
The types of KE (Vergara and Mondragón 2008) are as follows: classification of categories,
computer-aided system, mathematical model, hybrid system with forward and backward
reasoning, combination with virtual reality techniques, and collaborative design.
The use of KE in recent years has become an important discipline in the industrial and
academic world. Resulting from this expansion, Kansei Science and Kansei Design have
emerged, as presented by Lévy (2013). Kansei Science represents a meeting point between
Kansei and cognitive science, with the aim of characterizing and evaluating emotional
experiences and creativity to help understand the mind based on knowledge derived from
psychology and physiology.
By contrast, Kansei Design is another approach (Mahut et al. 2018). They are split into two
groups depending on the perspective: the first group focuses on the physical materiality of the
artefacts and their evaluation or preference by the user, while the second group focuses on the
interactive materiality of the artefacts. Kansei Design deals with ambiguity and uncertainty by
means of design skills, compared to the logical reasoning used by other Kansei approaches.
20
Affect, States of Mind, or Moods
According to Frijda (1994), Desmet (2002), and van Gorp (2012), moods are characterized by the
experience of a single dominant emotion over a given time. They are not as clear as emotions and
they do not usually have an immediate contextual provocation. Moods are less intense and last
longer than emotions. Emotions demand an urgent response. By contrast, this does not happen
with moods. They are related to lived experiences. Continued and influenced moods can alter
perception and affect people’s facial expressions, body language, personality, and behaviour
(Fantoni and Gerbino 2014).
Çakmakli (2010) identifies the ideal product’s features in accordance with the way people
think and judge. Her research has enabled the identification of seven traits that people look for in
products and people:

1. Attractiveness (sexy, cute, beautiful, graceful).
2. Social status (lifestyle, social class, value system).
3. Intelligence (smart, adaptive, intuitive, functions well).
4. Trustworthy (loyal, safe, trusting).
5. Empathy (understanding, adaptive, communicative).
6. Ambitious (innovative, forward-thinking, aspiring, motivated).
7. Exciting (good sense of humour, positivity, surprising, creative).
If products consistently express personality, people will tend to believe in them more and
purchase the designs (Knutson et al. 2006).
Another author, Schifferstein, investigates people’s level of connection with products, taking
into account the experience the user lives during a product’s entire useful life (Schifferstein and
Hekkert 2011). It is measured with a five-item scale developed along with Pelgrim (Schifferstein
and Pelgrim 2008). This scale defines the level of emotional connection through forty-eight
statements related to possible determinants, with respondents indicating the extent to which they
agree with the statements.
Analysis: Toward a New Emotional Systematization

One of the objectives of this systematic review and analysis research is to understand how a
taxonomy of emotional dimensions can be created, allowing students and professionals from
different sectors to work on multidisciplinary teams and projects in which the vocabulary and
meaning is common and understood by all. It also aims to promote the incorporation of
emotional dimensions in the design process in order to reaffirm the purpose of the project and to
respond to one of the highest consumer needs. For this reason, graphical representations,
understood as visual tools, have been designed to summarize all the information presented above
on the five emotional dimensions.
21

Figure 3: Emotional Path: Summary of the Differences between the Five Dimensions
Figure 3 has been drawn up to understand and synthesize the different dimensions, which
relationships they have, and, at the same time, which differences they have. In this visual, after
having first understood the glossary of each dimension, the order and the process that people
make upon receiving an external impulse until it can become part of an affective state is
summarized with an emotional path.
Samples of taxonomies or flows can be found in the literature that has been reviewed. These
show how the registering of a stimulus gives rise to an emotion which involves a decision and
will later be a memory, as presented, for example, by Torreblanca (2014). There are also those
classified by Desmet, van Erp, and Karlsson (2008), depending on the element they focus on as
regards sensorial experience, pleasant emotions, brand/identity, dynamic interaction, and
sources/stimuli. Additionally, another similar visual classifies the authors based on the stage of
the design process on which they focus, design method and approach, model/theory,
assessment/measurement, design application, and experiment/field work.
Based on this idea and taking the graphic system used by visual thesaurus (Thinkmap 1998)
as a reference, a new approach of the order for the five emotional dimensions has been sought.
The aim is to help to understand and synthesize all previously presented information.
The importance of this visual summary, an emotional path, lies in understanding which
points make a difference between sensation and perception, emotion and feeling, and affect,
without neglecting the common thread all these dimensions have. This is in addition to
understanding in which dimension one can act and when it is necessary to understand which tools
and/or techniques are the most appropriate to use, depending on the needs we have as design
engineers. For instance, this visual representation can be used as a graphic reference or summary
of the emotional dimensions and after consulting it and to detect what dimension is of interest, to
later on deepen in the theories, references and measurement tools. Or vice versa, knowing the
objective or interest of the professionals in a generic way to understand in what dimension the
information could be expanded.
22
For example, if the interest lies in seeing the user’s first reaction when a product is shown,
the research process can be approached through the senses and physiological measurements. If,
instead, understanding what meaning this external stimulus has for the user is desired, research
that allows physiological measurements to be contrasted with the user’s interpretation based on
their experiences and giving it meaning can be considered.
Thus, with this emotional path, one can visually understand what the aims are based on the
designer’s and engineer’s needs and how to apply this vocabulary correctly so as to not lead to
confusion.
To see the possible applications of emotional systematization, a visual map of the various
authors presented in this article has been drawn up, classified by the same colors as the emotional
dimensions: sensation (purple), perception (green), emotion (blue), feeling (yellow), and affect
(red), as can be seen in the Figure 4.

Figure 4: Emotional Systematization: Summary of the Five Dimensions and Authors
As mentioned above, uses of this emotional systematization map can range from referenced
consultations to inspiration, where designers and engineers can find reference authors with
different perspectives to enrich their projects.
Conclusion
The objective of this article is to propose and establish a common framework on the different
emotional dimensions. This research proposes a visual tool and a solid theoretical framework in
order to allow fluid and effective communication between the different members of a project and
to help in the design process where emotions are one of the variables of design.
This article researched, through a systematic review process, the emotional dimensions and
their implications in design and in engineering design, to identify the main references, theories,
and measurement tools classified from five dimensions. These dimensions—sensation,
perception, emotion, feeling, and affect—have been standardized as definitions, taking into
23
account the different disciplines, thus creating a new emotional systematization to improve
understanding and communication between experts from all fields. After the definition for each
dimension, different theories concerning it and tools and techniques for measuring data have
been shown.
Additionally, by visualizing data, in Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4, the information in the article has
been synthesized to be used as a visual guide when applying this knowledge and facilitating the
work of engineers and designers during the research and planning process for a new product
and/or service centered on the user and their emotions, since the integration of emotions involves
solving one of the highest needs of users and consumers.
To conclude, it has been shown the potential of how emotional values—that allow for a
better design solution—can be taken into account through the application of various techniques
in the engineering and design fields. This can encourage the creation of a product that, apart from
meeting functional and usability needs, could create an emotional connection with people. Also,

emotional values can be a source of innovation as they can help to identify the opportunities and
strengths of a specific project.
It should be emphasised that education can be a key moment for learning these dimensions
and internalizing them to later be able to design ideas and make them tangible. Whether for
professionals or students, emotional dimensions can be integrated correctly through the proposed
taxonomy.
The results of this article can serve as an emotional visual tool, guide, inspiration, source of
innovation, learning and reference, and taxonomy as a basis in projects with multidisciplinary
teams. All these applications seek to respond to and apply emotional dimensions in the most
correct and consensual way in order to make a significant contribution to design and engineering
projects.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank ELISAVA, Barcelona School of Design and Engineering and
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya.
24
REFERENCES
Abella Garcia, Ainoa, Maria José Araya, Laura Clèries, and Lluís Marco-Almagro. 2019.
“Perception Evaluation Kit: A Case Study with Materials.” The International Journal of
Design Education 13 (4): 69–88. https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v13i04/69-
88.
Bandini Buti, Luigi, Mario Bisson, Cristina Boeri, Gisella Gellini, and Salvatore Zingale. 2010.
Progetto & Multisensorialità: Come gli Oggetti Sono e Come ci Appaiono [Project and
Multisensoriality: How Objects are and How They Appear to Us]. Milan: FrancoAngeli.
Bau, Oliver, and Ivan Poupyrev. 2012. “REVEL: Tactile Feedback Technology for Augmented
Reality.” ACM Transactions on Graphics 31 (4): 89:1–89:11.
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2185520.2185585.

Bencina, Ross, Danielle Wilde, and Somaya Langley. 2008. “Gesture = Sound Experiments:
Process and Mappings.” Paper presented at Conference on New Interfaces for Musical
Expression, Genova, June 4–6, 2008.
Bisquerra, Rafael. 2016. Universo de Emociones [Universe of Emotions]. Valencia: PalauGea.
Boundless. 2016. “Mapping the Primary Somatosensory Area.” Boundless. Accessed June 22,
2019. http://oer2go.org/mods/en-boundless/www.boundless.com/physiology/textbooks
/boundless-anatomy-and-physiology-textbook/peripheral-nervous-system-13/the-
somatosensory-system-129/mapping-the-primary-somatosensory-area-693-
7462/index.html.
Çakmakli, Ayça. 2010. “A Good Design = A Good Mate.” Paper presented at the Seventh
International Conference on Design & Emotion, Chicago, October 4–7, 2010.
Centro Studi Assaggiatori. 2012. “Sensory Box Explorer.” Centro Studi Assagiatori Italian
Tasters. Accessed May 7, 2019. http://shop.assaggiatori.com/en/Library//Sensory-Box-
Explorer.html.
Chapman, Jonathan. 2015. Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy.
New York: Routledge.
Choi, Kwang-Ho, Junbeom Kim, O. Sang Kwon, Min Ji Kim, Yeon Hee Ryu, and Ji-Eun Park.
2017. “Is Heart Rate Variability (HRV) an Adequate Tool for Evaluation Human
Emotions? – A Focus on the Use of the International Affective Picture System (IAPS).”
Psychiatry Research 251: 192–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.02.025.
CRAIC Technologies. 2018. “What is a Spectrophotometer?” CRAIC Technologies. Accessed
May 7, 2019. http://www.microspectra.com/support/learn/what-is-a-spectrophotometer.
Dal Palù, Doriana, Claudia De Giorgi, Arianna Astolfi, Beatrice Lerma, and Eleonora Buiatti.
2014. “SounBe, a Toolkit for Designers Dealing with Sound Projects.” Paper presented
at the 13th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, May 19–22, 2014.
Damasio, Antonio. 1994. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York:
Grosset/Putnam, Inc.
Desmet, Pieter M.A. 2002. Designing Emotions. Delft: Pieter Desmet.
———. 2003. “Measuring Emotions. Development and Application of an Instrument to Measure
Emotional Response to Products.” In Funology, from Usability to Enjoyment, edited by
Mark A. Blythe, Kees Overbeeke, Andrew F. Monk, and Peter C. Wright, 111–23.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
———. 2012. “Faces of Product Pleasure: 25 Positive Emotions in Human-Product
Interactions.” International Journal of Design 6 (2): 1–29.
———. 2013. Positive Design. Delft: Delft University of Technology.
Desmet, Pieter M. A., and Anna E. Pohlmeyer. 2013. “Positive Design: An Introduction to
Design for Subjective Well-being.” International Journal of Design 7 (3): 5–19.
Desmet, Pieter M. A., Jeroen van Erp, and MariAnne Karlsson. 2008. Design & Emotion Moves.
Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
25
Ekman, Paul. 2004. Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve
Communication and Emotional Life. New York: Owl Books.
———. 2016. “What Scientists Who Study Emotion Agree About.” Perspectives on
Psychological Science 11 (1): 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615596992.
Ekman, Paul, Wallace Friesen, and Phoebe Ellsworth. 1972. Emotion in Human Face:
Guidelines for Research and an Integration of Findings. New York: Pergamon Press
Inc.
Eyetracking Inc. 2011. Eyetracking. Accessed November 22, 2018. http://www.eyetracking
.com/.
Fantoni, Carlo, and Walter Gerbino. 2014. “Body Actions Change the Appearance of Facial
Expressions.” PloS ONE 9 (9): e108211. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108211.
Fokkinga, Steven F., and Pieter M. A. Desmet. 2013. “Ten Ways to Design for Disgust, Sadness,
and Other Enjoyments: A Design Approach to Enrich Product Experiences with

Negative Emotions.” International Journal of Design 7 (1): 19–36.
Frijda, Nico H. 1994. “Varieties of Affect: Emotions and Episodes, Moods and Sentiments.” In
The Nature of Emotion, Fundamental Questions, edited by Paul Ekman, and Richard
Davidson, 59–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Germak, Claudio. 2013. “Il Progetto Poliedro. Modello di Valutazione Multicriteria di
Sostenibilità e Qualità del Prodotto Alimentare Tipico” [The Poliedro Project. Model of
Multicriteria Evaluation of Sustainability and Quality of the Typical Food Product]. In
Sustainable Packaging? A Multicriteria Evaluation Method for Food Packaging, edited
by Claudia De Giorgi, 16–29. Turin: Umberto Allemandi & C.
Gorno, Roberta. 2013. “Practical Design Methods: Design and Emotion.” In Design Research:
Between Scientific Method and Project Praxis, edited by Lucia Rampino, 141–52.
Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Ho, Amic G., and Kin Wai Michael Siu. 2010. “Role of Designers in the New Perspective of
Design and Emotion.” Design Principles and Practices 4 (3): 15–24.
https://doi.org/10.18848/1833-1874/CGP/v04i03/37884.
Izard, Carroll E. 1992. “Basic Emotions, Relations among Emotions, and Emotion-Cognition
Relations.” Pscychological Review 99 (3): 561–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.99.3.561.
Jordan, Patrick W. 2000. Designing Pleasurable Products: An Introduction to the New Human
Factors. London: Taylor & Francis.
Kamp, Irene, and Pieter M. A. Desmet. 2014. “Measuring Product Happiness.” Paper presented
at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, April 26–May 1,
2014.
Knutson, Brian, Scott Rick, G. Elliott Wimmer, Drazen Prelec, and George Loewenstein. 2007.
“Neural Predictors of Purchases.” Neuron 53 (1): 147–56.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.11.010.
Kouprie, Merlijn, and Froukje Sleeswijk Visser. 2009. “A Framework for Empathy in Design:
Stepping into and out of the User’s Life.” Journal of Engineering Design 20 (5): 437–
48. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820902875033.
Krippendorff, Klaus. 2006. The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation for Design. London: Taylor
& Francis Group.
Lakhotia, Vatsala. 2011. “Design for Happiness.” Paper presented at the 3rd International
Conference on Research into Design Engineering, Bangalore, January 10–12, 2011.
Lasa, Ganix, Daniel Justel, Itsaso Gonzalez, Ion Iriarte, and Ester Val. 2017. “Next Generation of
Tools for Industry to Evaluate the User Emotional Perception: the Biometric-based
Multimethod Tools.” The Design Journal 20 (1): S2771–S2777.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352788.
26
Laughlin, Zoe. 2008. “Investigating the Acousting Propierties of Materials with Tuning Forks.”
Paper presented at Materials & Sensations, Pau, October 22–24, 2008.
Lerma, Beatrice, and Doriana Dal Palù. 2016. “Material (and Product) Sensoriality: Can
Perceptive Evaluations Strengthen the Meta-Design Phase?” Temes de Disseny 32: 10–
23.
Lévy, Pierre. 2013. “Beyond Kansei Engineering: The Emancipation of Kansei Design.”
International Journal of Design 7 (2): 83–94.
Lexico. 2019. “Perception.” Lexico by Oxford. Accessed November 19, 2019.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/perception.
Li, Xiang, Dawei Song, Peng Zhang, Guangliang Yu, Yuexian Hou, and Bin Hu. 2016. “Emotion
Recognition from Multi-channel EEG Data through Convolutional Recurrent Neural
Network.” Paper presented at IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and
Biomedicine, Shenzhen, December 15–18, 2016.

Lokman, Anitawati Mohd. 2010. “Design & Emotion: The Kansei Engineering Methodology.”
Malaysian Journal of Computing 1 (1): 1–11.
Lokman, Anitawati Mohd, Khairul Khalil Ishak, and Ana Hadiana. 2013. “Premo and Kansei: A
Comparative Analysis.” International Journal of Basic and Applied Science 4 (1): 734–
44.
Mahut, Theo, Carole Bouchard, Jean-Francois Omhover, Carole Favart, and Daniel Esquivel.
2018. “Interdependency between User Experience and Interaction: a Kansei Design
Approach.” International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing 12 (1):
105–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-017-0381-4.
Miller, David N. 2011. “Positive Affect.” In Encyclopedia of Child Behavior and Development,
edited by Sam Goldestein, and Jack A. Naglieri, 1121–22. New York: Springer US,
Springer Science+Business Media LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-
9_2193.
Mottram, Donald S., and J. Stephen Elmore. 2003. “Sensory Evaluation Aroma.” In
Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, edited by Benjamin Caballero, Paul
Finglas, and Fidel Toldra, 5174–80. London: Academic Press.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-227055-X/01068-3.
Nagamachi, Mitsuo, and Anitawati Mohd Lokman. 2003. Innovation in Kansei. Tokyo: CRC
Press.
NCS Colour. 2018a. “NCS Gloss Scale.” NCS Colour AB. Accessed May 7, 2019.
http://ncscolour.com/product/ncs-gloss-scale/.
———.2018b. “NCS Lightness Meter.” NCS Colour AB. Accessed May 7, 2019.
http://ncscolour.com/product/lightness-meter/.
Noldus Information Technology. 2018a. “FaceReader.” Noldus. Accessed May 7, 2019.
https://www.noldus.com/human-behavior-research/products/facereader.
———. 2018b. “The Observer XT.” Noldus. Accessed May 7, 2019.
https://www.noldus.com/office/es/observer-xt.
Norman, Donald Arthur. 2004. Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things.
New York: Basic Books.
Oliver, Núria. 2017. “La Tecnologia en la Vida Quotidiana: el Mòbil Canvia la Pell”
[Technology in Everyday Life: the Cell Phone Changes Skin]. Paper presented at
Universitat d’Estiu Andorra [Andorra Summer University], Andorra, September 3–6,
2017.
Ozkaramanli, Deger, Pieter M. A. Desmet, and Paul Hekkert. 2012. “Proud to be in Control:
Understanding Concern Conflicts and Initial Principles for Conflict-Inspired Design
Strategies.” Paper presented at 8th International Design and Emotion Conference,
London, September 11–14, 2012.
27
Ozkaramanli, Deger, Pieter M. A. Desmet. 2012. “I Knew I Shouldn’t, Yet I Did It Again!
Emotion-driven Design as a Means to Motivate Subjective Well-being.” International
Journal of Design 6 (1): 27–39.
Pagliarini, Ella. 2002. Valutazione sensoriale: Aspetti Teorici, Pratici e Metodologici [Sensory
Evaluation: Theoretical, Practical and Methodology Aspects]. Milan: Hoepli.
Panksepp, Jack. 1998. Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations on Human and Animal
Emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.
———. 2004. Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Pantone. 2017. “Pantone Colours.” Pantone. Accessed May 7, 2019. http://www.pantone-
colours.com/.
Posner, Jonathan, James A. Russell, and Bradley S. Peterson. 2005. “The Circumplex Model of
Affect: An Integrative Approach to Affective Neuroscience, Cognitive Development,

and Psychopathology.” Development and Psychopathology 17 (3): 715–34.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579405050340.
Real Academia Española (RAE). 2018. “Percepción” [Perception]. Real Academia Española.
Accessed May 7, 2019. http://dle.rae.es/?id=SX9HJy3.
Reeves, Bryon, and Clifford Nass. 1998. The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers,
Television and New Media like Real People and Places. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ros. 2015. “The Bio Tac – Multimodal Tactile Sensor.” Ros.org. Accessed November 18, 2019.
http://wiki.ros.org/BioTac.
Russell, James A. 1980. “A Circumplex Model of Affect.” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 39 (6): 1161–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077714.
Saéz, Cristina. 2012. “Las Percepciones Sensoriales” [Sensory Perceptions].
La Vanguardia: Vida. http://www.lavanguardia.com/estilos-de-vida/20120629
/54316673688/las-percepciones-sensoriales.html.
Sanders, Elizabeth B. N. 1992. “Converging Perspectives: Product Development Research for the
1990s.” Design Management Journal 3 (4): 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1948-
7169.1992.tb00604.x.
Scarpellini, Ilaria. 2013. “The Emotion Rainbow.” Delft Institute of Positive Design.
https://diopd.org/emotion-rainbow/.
Scherer, Klaus R. 2005. “What are Emotions? And How Can they be Measured?” Social Science
Information 44 (4): 695–729. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018405058216.
Schifferstein, Hendrik N. J., and Elly P. H Zwartkruis-Pelgrim. 2008. “Consumer-product
Attachment: Measurement and Design Implications.” International Journal of Design 2
(3): 1–14.
Schifferstein, Hendrik N. J, and Paul Hekkert. 2011. Product Experience. New York: Elsevier.
Schütte, Simon. 2002. “Designing Feelings into Products: Integrating Kansei Engineering
Methodology in Product Development.” PhD diss., Linköpings University.
Schütte, Simon, Jörgen Eklund, Jan R. C. Axelsson, and Mitsuo Nagamachi. 2004. “Concepts,
Methods and Tools in Kansei Engineering.” Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 5
(3): 214–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922021000049980.
Schütte, Simon, Jörgen Eklund, Shigekazu Ishihara, and Mitsuo Nagamachi. 2007. The Kansei
Engineering Approach. London: Elsevier.
Straker, Karla, and Cara Wrigley. 2015. “The Role of Emotion in Product, Service and Business
Model Design.” Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation 11 (1): 11–
28. https://doi.org/10.7341/20151112.
The New School. 2017. “Reimagine Technology for Humans.” The New School. Accessed June
26, 2019. https://www.newschool.edu/research-and-work/reimagine-technology-for-
humans/.
28
Thinkmap. 1998. “Perception.” Visual Theasaurus. Accessed November 22, 2018.

https://www.visualthesaurus.com/app/view.
Tomkins, Silvan S. 2009. “Affect Theory.” In Approaches to Emotion, edited by Paul Ekman and
Klaus R. Scherer, 163–95. New York: Psychology Press.
Torreblanca, Francisco. 2014. “La Secuencia Mágica: Estímulo, Emoción, Decisión y Recuerdo”
[The Magic Sequence: Stimulus, Emotion, Decision and Memory]. Blog Francisco
Torreblanca. https://franciscotorreblanca.es/estimulo-emocion-decision-y-recuerdo/.
van Gorp, Trevor, and Edie Adams. 2012. Design for Emotion. Waltham, MA: Morgan
Kaufmann.
van Hout, Marco. 2019. “About Me.” Marco van Hout. Accessed June 26, 2019.
https://www.marcovanhout.com/.
van Laack, Alexander Walter. 2014. Measurement of Sensory and Cultural Influences on Haptic
Quality Perception of Vehicle Interiors. Aachen: van Laack GmbH.

Vergara, Margarita, and Salvador Mondragón. 2008. “Ingeniería Kansei: una Potente
Metodología Aplicada al Diseño Emocional” [Kansei Engineering: a Powerful
Methodology Applied to Emotional Design]. Faz 2008 (2): 49–56.
Walter, Aarron. 2011. Designing for Emotions. New York: A Book Apart.
Wundt, Wilhelm. 1912. An Introduction to Psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Yoon, JungKyoon, Pieter M. A. Desmet, and Anna E. Pohlmeyer. 2013. “Embodied Typology of
Positive Emotions: The Development of a Tool to Facilitate Emotional Granularity in
Design.” Paper presented at 5th International Congress of International Association of
Societies of Design Research, Tokyo, August 26–30, 2013.
Yoon, JungKyoon, Anna E. Pohlmeyer, and Pieter M. A. Desmet. 2016. “When ‘Feeling Good’
is not Good Enough: Seven Key Opportunities for Emotional Granularity in Product
Development.” International Journal of Design 10 (3): 1–15.
Zheng, Wei-Long, Bo-Nan Dong and Bao-Liang Lu. 2014. “Multimodal Emotion Recognition
using EEG and Eye Tracking Data.” Paper presented at the 36th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Chicago, August
26–30, 2014.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Ainoa Abella Garcia: PhD student, ELISAVA Research, ELISAVA Barcelona School of
Design and Engineering and Department of Statistics and Operations Research,
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya- BarcelonaTech, Barcelona, Spain
Laura Clèries Garcia: Head of ELISAVA Research, ELISAVA Barcelona School of

Design and Engineering, Barcelona, Spain
Lluís Marco Almagro: Professor and Researcher, Department of Statistics and Operations
Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya- BarcelonaTech, Barcelona, Spain
29
and Professional Practice is one of six thematically
focused journals in the family of journals that support
the Design Principles and Practices Research
Network—its journals, book imprint, conference, and
online community. It is a section of Design Principles
and Practices: An International Journal.

and Professional Practice explores the organization
of design, design work, and design as a
professional practice. As well as papers of a
traditional scholarly type, this journal invites
presentations of practice—including case studies
documenting professional practice, accompanied
by exegeses analyzing organizational purposes,
processes, and effects.

and Professional Practice is a peer-reviewed
scholarly journal.
ISSN 2325-162X

Design Management and Professional Practice: Framework of Emotional Dimensions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design Management and Professional Practice: Framework of Emotional Dimensions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VOLUME 13 ISSUE 3

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Framework of Emotional Dimensions

AINOA ABELLA GARCIA, LAURA CLÈRIES GARCIA, AND LLUÍS MARCO-ALMAGRO

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PUBLISHING

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

The International Journal of Design Management and Professional Practice

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Literature Research Methodology: Systematic Review

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Research Study: Terminology and Measuring Tools

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

 Emotionally durable design (Chapman 2015) proposes a vision focused on using

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Affect, States of Mind, or Moods

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Analysis: Toward a New Emotional Systematization

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

Thinkmap. 1998. “Perception.” Visual Theasaurus. Accessed November 22, 2018.

Downloaded by Andrea Pino on Mon Jan 27 2020 at 16:44:02 PM -05

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Laura Clèries Garcia: Head of ELISAVA Research, ELISAVA Barcelona School of

The International Journal of Design Management

The International Journal of Design Management

You might also like