材質與造形衝突之產品意象研究－以坐椅為例

Abstract

隨著科技的進步，材料的製作與加工方式不斷地改進，各種新材質也陸續地被開發，產品的造形不再受限於製造方式。因此，現代設計的造形不見得忠實地反應出產品材質，甚至有許多產品的造形與材質具有完全不同的意象。究竟產品設計的材質和造形具有相衝突的意象時，消費者會給予這樣的產品如何的評價，是現在產品設計師需要了解的課題之一。 本研究分為兩個階段，第一階段以所挑選出的6種材質與19個造形，探討材質與造形意象之關聯性，定義出衝突的條件。在材質意象之感受上，實際材質與以文字描述的材質樣本，所獲得的意象感受結果具有相似性。在造形意象之感受上，受測者對造形之熟悉度並不影響造形意象之作答，並且對於簡潔、曲面之造形較喜愛。透過因子分析，可將本研究使用之12組意象形容詞歸納為3個因子，分別是藻飾性因子、力度性因子、及評價性因子。但是以材質與造形意象之因子距離和直接判斷造形與材質是否諧調之結果，並不完全相同。 第二階段將相衝突與相諧調的材質與造形結合，了解衝突之材質與造形對受測者之感受有何影響。從因子得分之空間分布圖來看，協調樣本在藻飾性因子中，較偏向原造形之意象；在力度性因子中，與原造形、原材質之位置相近；而在評價性因子中，諧調樣本之評價較原材質與原造形低。衝突樣本在藻飾性因子中，則較偏向材質之意象；金屬材質之衝突樣本，在力度性因子上大大地增強金屬材質之剛硬意象。而在評價性因子中則介於原造形與原材質之間。除此之外，受測者之偏好與諧調感受具有相關性，越諧調之樣本獲得越喜愛之意象。 藉由本研究對材質與造形意象之探討，期望能夠給予工業設計師在材質與造形之搭配選擇上之參考。

With the progress of science and technology, the ways of making and processing materials are improving constantly and various kinds of new materials have continually been developed. Therefore, the forms of products are no longer limited by the way of manufacturing. On the other hand, the forms of design now have not to faithfully reflect the characters of or to be concordant with the materials which are used into the product, any more. In this situation, it is an important issue for product designers to understand what the image will be if a product is composed of form and material with discord images. This study aims to probe into this issue by means of the method of semantic differential (SD) evaluation on some forms of famous chairs and common materials as stimuli.

In this study, experts and representative users were recruited in a focus group to decide the 12 adjective pairs as image scale and 19 sculptures and chair design samples as form stimuli for the semantic differential evaluation on product form image. In addition, 6 materials commonly used in chair design were selected as material stimuli for another set of semantic differential evaluation with the same12 adjective pairs. The stimuli of the material samples were displayed to the subjects either with a square patches of real material or just with the name of the material; while the stimuli of chair forms were presented as black-and-white pictures with pointillism treatment. Then, 60 subjects were recruited for the impressive assessments on both chair forms and materials with SD questionnaires. These subjects were also asked to select the appropriate material and the inappropriate material for each product form.

Through the factor analysis on the data of SD survey, a common image space to accommodate both form and material was constructed. By computing and comparing the distances among a form and different materials in this space, we found the discordant and concordant materials for the form. By summarizing this result with the result of subjects’ direct selection of appropriate and inappropriate materials for forms, 7 concord pairs and 7 discord pairs of material and form were concluded, and the corresponding samples were constructed accordingly by computer graphics as stimuli for another SD survey to reveal the images of products which are composed of form and material with discordant images.