Biomedical subjects

Paul Hekkert

Publications and source records attributed to Paul Hekkert.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Grounding abstract object characteristics in embodied interactions.

Recent studies in cognitive linguistics have demonstrated that objects are conceptualised in terms of the actions they afford, i.e., in terms of their spatial-functional meaning. Since our interactions are constrained by the structure of our body, these studies view conceptualisation as essentially embodied. In this paper we argue that an object's abstract/figurative meaning is also embodied in that it is grounded in patterns of recurrent interactions with our environment, referred to as image schemas. On the basis of the spatial, relational structure of three such image schemas, two everyday products, a jug and an alarm clock, were systematically varied on form dimensions. Experiment 1 showed that participants with a background in design relate abstract characteristics to the form changes in the way predicted. To rule out the possibility that the relations uncovered are due to learned associations, a replication of the experiment was conducted with nai ve participants (experiment 2), leading to highly similar results. In experiment 3, we tested the cross-cultural consistency of our findings by performing a second replication with Brazilian participants. The results of this experiment were only partly in line with our predictions, suggesting that cultural differences in interacting with the environment to some degree affect our understanding of the abstract meaning of objects.

Brazil↗

PubMed2003

'Most advanced, yet acceptable': typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design.

Typicality and novelty have often been shown to be related to aesthetic preference of human artefacts. Since a typical product is rarely new and, conversely, a novel product will not often be designated as typical, the positive effects of both features seem incompatible. In three studies it was shown that typicality (operationalized as 'goodness of example') and novelty are jointly and equally effective in explaining the aesthetic preference of consumer products, but that they suppress each other's effect. Direct correlations between both variables and aesthetic preference were not significant, but each relationship became highly significant when the influence of the other variable was partialed out. In Study 2, it was furthermore demonstrated that the expertise level of observers did not affect the relative contribution of novelty and typicality. It was finally shown (Study 3) that a more 'objective' measure of typicality, central tendency - operationalized as an exemplar's average similarity to all other members of the category - yielded the same effect of typicality on aesthetic preference. In sum, all three studies showed that people prefer novel designs as long as the novelty does not affect typicality, or, phrased differently, they prefer typicality given that this is not to the detriment of novelty. Preferred are products with an optimal combination of both aspects.

Adolescent↗