Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
design+emotion
Human emotion response to typographic design: initial findings Beth E. Koch, Assistant Professor University of Minnesota Duluth
While much effort has been aimed at
understanding language and
the psychological underpinnings
of written and verbal communication,
the mechanisms of visual literacy
have continued to elude researchers.
Design science
Designers do not want others to understand their methods of creativity.
Theoretical underpinning
Perception Theory of Visual Communication applies neurological research and accepted psychological principles to the study of visual communication — Barry, 2002
Perceptual Aesthetics
Theory
“Neurological research has shown that humans respond pre-consciously and consciously, logically and illogically, to visual imagery” — Barry, 2005
Design “Most practitioners of design remain unaware that what they are really selling to clients is indeed emotion” — Karjaluoto, 2004
Vision The process of attaching emotional responses to information happens primarily in the right–brain and occurs a full half-second before the information is processed and reaches consciousness — Gazzaniga, 1998
Vision Different cells in the retina become selectively tuned to detect surprisingly subtle features of the visual scene — Nelson, 2001
Neural Processing
of Visual Features
Motion
Spatial relationships
Color
Size
Direction
Edges
Form (shape)
Pattern
Research Questions
Do people sense emotion when viewing type designs?
Are certain emotions associated with the formative design features of typefaces—differences in classification (serif or sans serif), terminal construction (angular or rounded), character width (condensed or extended), and weight (light or bold)?
Stimuli Helvetica Light
Helvetica Bold
Helvetica Condensed Bold
Helvetica Bold Extended
Helvetica Rounded
Glypha Medium
Introduction to the Declaration of Independence — Poffenberger &Franken (1923)
“Now is the time for all good men… ” — Davis & Smith (1933)
Artificial languages “ere sasesuth wid oteren bo” — Weaver (1949)
Format to approximate English — Wendt (1968)
Alphabets (ABC… abc… ?+!@...) — Kastl &Child (1968), Tannenbaum et al. (1964), Benton (1979)
“Lorem ipsum” greek —Morrison (1986)
Typeface sampler — Koch (2011)
Data collection
Presentation format: Non-verbal reporting mechanism (Morrison, 1986)
Instrumentation
Participants
Analysis and
Findings
Paired t-Tests p=.05
People respond to type designs with emotion. Certain emotions are associated with the formative design features of typefaces.
Weight
Emotion responses indicate that the Light weight typeface Helvetica Light is
more desired more satisfying and more fascinating
than bold weight typeface Helvetica Bold
Desire paired t(df 41) = 3.3, p = 0.05 (95% confidence) Satisfaction paired t(df 41) = 2.6, p = 0.05 (95% confidence) Fascination paired t(df 41) = 4.0, p = 0.05 (95% confidence)
Desire Joy ShamePride Disgust SadnessSatisfaction Fascination FearHope Dissatisfaction Boredom
Helvetica Light
Helvetica Bold
0.0000
0.2000
0.4000
0.6000
0.8000
1.0000
1.2000
1.4000
1 0.0000
0.2000
0.4000
0.6000
0.8000
1.0000
1.2000
1 0.0000
0.2000
0.4000
0.6000
0.8000
1.0000
1.2000
1.4000
1
Desire Satisfaction Fascination
Classification Emotion responses indicate that the serif typeface Glypha Medium is
more satisfying than sans serif typeface Helvetica Bold
Satisfaction paired t(df 41) = 2.1, p = 0.05 (95% confidence)
Glypha Bold
Desire Joy ShamePride Disgust SadnessSatisfaction Fascination FearHope Dissatisfaction Boredom
Helvetica Bold
0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1.0000
1
Satisfaction
Terminals Emotion responses to the rounded terminals of the typeface Helvetica Rounded Bold are
Not significantly different than than emotion responses to the square terminals of the typeface Helvetica Bold.
Desire Joy ShamePride Disgust SadnessSatisfaction Fascination FearHope Dissatisfaction Boredom
Helvetica Bold
Helvetica Rounded
Character width Narrow character width of typeface
Helvetica Bold Condensed is more desired more satisfying more joyous and more fascinating
than wide character width of typeface Helvetica Extended Bold. Desire paired t(df 41) = 3.3, p = 0.05 (95% confidence) Satisfaction paired t(df 41) = 2.6, p = 0.05 (95% confidence) Joy paired t(df 41) = 2.8, p = 0.05 (95% confidence) Fascination paired t(df 41) = 4.0, p = 0.05 (95% confidence)
Desire Joy ShamePride Disgust SadnessSatisfaction Fascination FearHope Dissatisfaction Boredom
Helvetica Bold
Condensed
Helvetica Bold
Extended
0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1.0000
1 0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1.0000
1 0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1.0000
1 0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1
Desire Satisfaction Joy Fascination
Glypha Bold
Desire Joy ShamePride Disgust SadnessSatisfaction Fascination FearHope Dissatisfaction Boredom
Helvetica Light
Helvetica Bold
Helvetica Bold
Condensed
Helvetica Bold
Extended
Helvetica Rounded
Conclusions Since each pair of typestyles was selected to evaluate the design polarities of a single typographic feature, the results showed that design features can be linked to positive or negative emotions.
Researchers should continue to conduct design studies that apply knowledge across disciplines in order to promote and produce evidence that substantiates design’s unique knowledge domain, as this study significantly demonstrates.
Conclusions Because people reported the same emotion response to the same typographic design features, this study suggests that design’s underlying features represent a common visual language.
“We must search for visual literacy in many places and many ways, in methods for training artists, in the technical training of craftsmen and artisans, in psychological theory, in nature, and in the physiological workings of the human organism itself” —Dondis, 1973
Thank You presented in franklin gothic book
