造形特徵與風格演變的相關性研究－以圈椅設計為例

Exploring the Relationship between the Form Feature and the Style Evolution-Using Loop Chair Designs as Examples

10.7060/KNUJST.200512.0027

陳俊智(Chun-Chih Chen)

風格 ； 意象 ； 典範性 ； 形態特徵 ； 複回歸分析 ； 數量化一類 ； product design ； style ； typicality ； multiple regression ； Quantification Ⅰ

高雄師大學報：自然科學與科技類

19期（2005 / 12 / 01）

27 - 43

繁體中文

設計師應從自身文化中尋求原創本質，建立屬於自己的文化語言與符號，將傳統文化視為創作的基礎進行傳統風格的演變。因此，研究以傳統中國圈椅設計為探討對象，委由受測者進行現代中國圈椅風格典範性評價，評選出風格之典範原型與不同意象特質。研究結果指出，測試坐椅之間具有不同的現代中國風格的典範差異。圈背、背靠板造形與結構形式是影響現代中國風格典範性的重要形態特徵。再藉由數量化一類的分析，得知不同造形項目之各個形態因子對於風格典範性的效益值與權重。又為了比較風格演變前後之意象變化，針對傳統圈椅與現代圈椅設計進行意象調查，結果指出有關傳統圈椅與現代圈椅在意象認知上有著明顯的差異，而現代中國圈椅的意象評估因子，經因素分析的萃取，包括審美因子、力量因子與形態因子等三個因素；進一步藉由意象認知空間與意象群聚的分析，說明意象與風格演變的相關性。

Designers should develop the unique design languages and rules by mining from their own culture and tradition. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships between the feature as well as typicality and image of chair designs on the operation of style evolution. And Chinese loop-chairs were used as examples to investigate the users' cognition of style evolution, from traditional to modern style. The cognitive experiment was conducted to identify the typicality effect in style category membership of modern Chinese style. According to the relative research the critical factors influencing the cognition of style evolution were the features and the degrees of feature transformation. For identifying the optimal operation of the feature transformation, a fuzzy evaluation was conducted by the experts. Multiple linear regression then was applied to analyze the relationship between the typicality of these designs and the form features, i.e. the typicality evaluated result treated as dependent variables, and fuzzy evaluation on design features of these designs as independent variables. The results indicated that these features: armrest, back-plank and structure were the critical factors for perceiving and recognizing style. Furthermore Quantification Ⅰ was applied to obtain the weights of the form features for users' typicality evaluation, and the design reference model developed. For comparing the difference between the traditional and modernized styles on image perception and typicality of these designs, a SD test then was held. Factor analysis was conducted on the SD evaluation data, and three main factors of the users’ image perception and expression, including shape factor, strength factor and aesthetic factor, were extracted. Cluster analysis was conducted on the factor scores obtained from factor analysis. By comparing the clustering of these designs indicated that the users' image perception and the typicality of these design were relative.

1. Andrea Branzi(1989).Design Discourse.Chicago.
2. Atkin, R. H.(1974).Mathematical Structure in Human Affairs.London:Heinemann Educational Books.
3. Chan C-S(1992).Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design.
4. Chen, Kuohsiang(1995).Chicago,Illinois Institute of Technology.
5. Crozier R.(1994).Manufactured Pleasures-Psychological Response to Design.Manchester, UK:Manchester University Press.
6. Greenbaum, T. L.(1993).The Handbook for Focus Group Research.NY:Lexington Books.
7. Jansson, D G,Condoor, S S,Brock ,H R(1992).Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design.
8. Mike Baxter著、張建成譯(1998)。產品設計與開發。六合出版社。
9. Nielsen, J.(1993).Usability Engineering.United Kingdom edition publish by Academic Press LTD.
10. Zwick, F.(1967).New Method of Thought and Procedure: symposium on Methodologies.Pasadena.
11. 林峰田、王鴻祥(1998)。風格的邏輯。第三屆設計學術研究成果研討會論文集下冊
12. 陳俊智(2001)。以坐椅設計為例探討中西設計風格的認知與判斷。設計學報，6(2)，79-99。
13. 陳俊智(1997)。中西坐椅設計風格認知模式之研究。第十二屆全國技術及職業教育研討會。
14. 陳國祥(1997)。造形風格之辨識與描述。設計學報，2(2)，123-143。
15. 蕭坤安(1995)。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所。
16. 鍵和田務等著(1992)。設計史。藝風堂出版社。