Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Approaches and theories of emotion.
As we will see in the following paragraphs, there are three different paths to emotion research, where one can place all its main theories, namely the basic emotion, appraisal, and the psychological constructionist (or also referred to as dimensional) approaches (Gendron & Barrett, 2009). These approaches mainly differ on what constitutes an emotion, and on the roles that the mind and the bodily changes play on emotional expression. These approaches will be briefly presented, but for a more detailed review, see Gendron and Barrett’s article (2009).
The basic emotion approach may be tracked down to the research of Charles Darwin (1873) on the expression of emotion. To Charles Darwin (1873), the relationship between specific states of mind and bodily expressions is so clear, and strong that its physical expression will ensue, independently of their usefulness. Darwin also acknowledged the direct unconscious action that the “excited” (or activated) nervous system will have on the body. Later on, Silvan Tomkins (1962, 1978) developed an affect theory. Tomkins distinguishes among: affect a term to portray physiological reactions, feeling was meant to signify the realization that an affect was taking place, and emotion was considered to be the combination of an affect and the memory of the experiences of that same affect.
Paul Ekman is another researcher whose work has been largely influenced by Darwin’s and Tomkins’ findings (Ekman, 1999), and tightly connected to the basic emotion approach. By comparing facial expressions across cultures, he identified six universal emotions: happiness, sadness, fear, disgust, anger and surprise (Ekman, 1970; Ekman et al., 1969). Later on he also added other positive and negative emotions, reaching 15 basic emotions in total (Ekman, 1999; Ekman & Friesen, 1986; see also Matsumoto, 1992), which according to him show unique universal signals, subjective experiences, distinctive thoughts and physiology, a quick onset and short duration, and occur with no control.
Overall, the crucial statement of the basic emotion approach is that a set of different and universal emotions exist, eliciting specific patterns of activation, behaviours, facial expressions, and appraisals (Fontaine, 2013). Nowadays this approach considers the existence of specific neural circuits or hardwiring into the brain, which would explain the universality of emotion, and the lack of need to be socially or culturally learned (Gendron & Barrett, 2009). Critics to this approach claim a problem of differentiation, as the majority of research does not support the idea that a specific pattern of neurobiological, phenomenological, expressive, behavioural, physiological response exists for each basic emotion (Barrett, 2006; for a meta-analysis on emotion specificity and the autonomic nervous system activity, see Kreibig, 2010; Scarantino, 17 2016). Moreover, the importance of cognition on emotion is seen as a critique to the basic emotion approach, with motivations, appraisals and intentions being prone to be influenced by cultural and social contexts (Ortony & Turner, 1990). Carroll Izard (1992), when addressing these critics in an article, restored the definition of basic, and distinguished the experience of emotion as a “feeling state” and motivation as motive, which implied a “more cognitively articulated goal”. More recently, this approach took some emotional variability into account by acknowledging the existence of cultural norms and their role on the expression of emotion (Gendron & Barrett, 2009).
Measuring the aesthetic experience.
So how can one measure this complex experience of cognitive and affective functioning? When measuring aesthetic experience, one may focus on different types of measure, but one may also focus on a single or multiple stages of the aesthetic experience (see models of aesthetic experience depicted in the section above).
Back in 1972, Berlyne listed the methods available in aesthetic research. These methods are quite similar to the ones used in emotion research, from verbal measures to behavioural measures. Indeed, Berlyne (1972) divides three categories of methods, which are the same used as those in emotion research: verbal judgements or the use of questionnaires or self-reports, psychophysiological recording, and the observation of non-verbal overt behaviour. The researcher in question finally identifies a fourth category of measures, which portrays the analysis of artistic material, but which we will not be further explored in this section.
Historically, research on aesthetics has notably relied on self-reports and questionnaires (verbal or written), such as Osgood’s semantic differential, in order to identify which features of a stimulus constitute aesthetic dimensions or properties (e.g.: Berlyne, 1972, 1973; Cupchik & Gebotys, 1990; Friedenberg & Bertamini, 2015; Oostendorp & Berlyne, 1978; Tinio & Leder, 2009). Indeed, by studying phenomena like the level of complexity, familiarity, symmetry, novelty, clarity, and hedonic value of a stimulus, such studies try to establish what and how factors categorize aesthetic response.
More recently, the use of psychophysiological methods has gained momentum in aesthetics research, and more notably the use of neural correlates. Indeed, the use of neural correlates has allowed the link between activity of different brain areas and stages of aesthetic experience (as described in the former section; for a more comprehensive view on the neural foundations of aesthetics see Cela-Conde et al., 2011; Kirsch, Urgesi, & Cross, 2016; Pearce et al., 2016). This field of research has become so prolific and influential that it started being denominated as neuroaesthetics. The framework developed by Chatterjee (2003) explained in the previous section refers to which areas are associated to which stage of the aesthetic experience, and hence will not be further discussed.
Besides studying brain activity, one may also study the activity of the autonomic nervous system concerning aesthetic experience. Until recently, studies on aesthetics focusing specifically on physiological measures such as skin conductance or heart rate (measures commonly used in emotion research) were scarce, especially in comparison with the multitude of studies on the neuroaesthetics field. However, with the development of more mobile technology, and when one considers the different facets of aesthetic perception (i.e. cognitive, emotional, behavioural and physiological), it makes sense to put together new methods that will allow to gain a better grasp on the overall process of aesthetic experience.
Aspects of visual perception to consider.
The knowledge of how visual perception occurs when looking at an object can and should be applied to the study of visual aesthetics (Chatterjee, 2003), and could hence also be applied to product design. In order to understand how a stimulus is appraised, one has to understand how this stimulus is captured by the senses first. In this review, and considering how the study of visual perception is integrated in aesthetics as well as emotion research, we will briefly introduce aspects of visual perception that are useful in product design, and aesthetics. These aspects focus on how elements are perceived and integrated in order to be able to be interpreted.
Visual perception refers to the processes that arise when an image reaches the eyes: at first, receptors in the eye capture information, which will then be formed into a pattern, in order to be finally identified and interpreted. In 1923, Max Wertheimer (1938) defined rules that were to guide how the grouping of elements occurs in visual perception. These principles that explain and organise visual perception became known as the Gestalt Rules. These rules were constructed under the assumption that we always try to perceive visual stimuli in the simplest and most regular way possible, and hence focus on shape organization, expecting to be able to identify what constitutes a “good shape”. Even though, with time, new principles were also discussed (see Wagemans et al., 2012), the basic Gestalt rules are the following (see Figure 7): good continuation (curves and surfaces are perceptually grouped even when they appear to be separated), proximity (elements that are close enough to each other will consistently be grouped together), equality (elements with common features, such as colour or shape, will also be grouped together), closure (if the elements are aligned in a particular fashion, one will perceive a closed area or volume), symmetry (a figure is the same as its mirror image), and common fate (when moving in a common direction and speed, elements are also perceived as one).
Table of contents :
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Résumé
Abstract
I General Introduction
II Literature Review
Chapter 1: Emotion & Aesthetics
1.1. Defining Emotion.
1.2. Approaches and theories of emotion.
1.3. Measuring emotion.
1.4. Introducing aesthetics.
1.5. Measuring the aesthetic experience.
1.6. Applications to product experience.
Chapter 2: Eye Movement & Visual Perception
2.1. Introducing eye tracking and pupillometry.
2.2. Aspects of visual perception to consider.
2.3. Top-down and Bottom-up processing of visual attention. Issue
III Experimental Framework
Chapter 3: Establishing Attentional Capture of Car Exterior Design
3.1. Study 1: Introduction.
3.2. Methodology
3.3. Results.
3.4. Discussion.
Chapter 4: Studying The Perception of Car Exterior Design
4.1. Study 2: Introduction.
4.2. Methodology
4.3. Results.
4.4. Discussion.
Chapter 5: Exploring the Importance of Context factors (namely size of the stimuli) on the Visual Perception of Car Exterior Design
5.1. Study 3: Introduction.
5.2. Methodology
5.3. Results.
5.4. Discussion.
IV General Discussion
Bibliography
