The Effect of Cultural and Educational Background in the Aesthetic Responses of Website Users

文化與教育背景差異之網頁美學感知研究

10.30105/JDS.201007.0005

陳儒毅(Ju-Yi Chen)；T W Allan Whitfield；Keith Robertson；陳月英(Yueh-Ying Chen)

美感 ； 網頁設計美感 ； 文化差異 ； 教育背景 ； Aesthetics ； Web Aesthetics ； Cultural Differences ； Educational Background

設計學研究

13卷1期（2010 / 07 / 01）

79 - 113

英文

根據研究報告指出關於人類視覺張力的相關刺激，左右人們對於美學感知的抉擇。就網頁視覺設計領域而言，量測視覺張力所構成的因子，有助於預測有效的美感組成元素，以吸引使用者的注意力。 然而，本研究發現：人們對於視覺張力的感知，並非固定或具一致性，而是因人而異。藉由探討使用者美感評價的各項變因，歸納網頁視覺的設計美感影響因素，作為有效傳達與溝通建議之基礎。 本研究取樣自澳洲與台灣兩地，就讀視覺傳達設計與資訊科技系的大學生為調查對象。透過Kress and van Leeuwens(1996)兩位學者所歸納出的四種視覺規範為基礎，作為量測的規範指標，這些規範分別為：技術性規範、感官性規範、抽象性規範與自然主義規範。Cleveland(2005)曾利用這些規範量測雜誌設計的視覺張力。本研究藉由這些規範，建立出關鍵性的因素分析，以探討網頁設計的視覺美感與使用者偏好抉擇的關係。問卷調查以李克10點量表為基礎，量測使用者對於網頁視覺設計感知上的反映回饋。統計結果歸納出兩項主要影響因子，首先是活力的刺激因子，其次為美感訴求因子。這些因子隨文化背景差異與教育背景不同等變因，產生視覺訴求的互異現象，這些結果將作為網頁設計者有效的參考建議。

People continuously make aesthetic choices on the basis of the relative power of visual stimuli. With regard to websites, measuring visual power can be used to predict the effectiveness of aesthetic elements in attracting audience attention. Moreover, research suggests that the perception of visual power is not a fixed or universal response; it varies between people of different backgrounds. This thesis investigates the aesthetic elements that make websites desirable for audiences of different cultural and educational backgrounds, and that enable web pages to better communicate information and affective experience. It tests the visual appeal of websites with groups of university students from the disciplines of Communication Design and Information Technology, and from both Australia and Taiwan, investigating variations in affective responses. The investigation adopts Kress and van Leeuwens' coding orientation for visual modality, that is, abstract coding, naturalistic coding, sensory coding and scientific/technological coding (1996). Cleveland (2005) applies these coding categories to ascertain the visual power of magazine design. The present study applies them to four categories of digital design to establish the key factors leading to website preference or selection. A questionnaire using a 10-point Likert-scale established students' affective responses to the four categories of digital design. The results show that both Dynamic Impact and Aesthetic Appeal emerge as underlying dimensions of visual presentation and that these vary for students of different cultural and educational backgrounds. In measuring and assessing the contribution of web aesthetics to visual appeal, the study serves as a useful reference for website designers.

1. Bell, C. (1914). Art. London.
2. Proceedings of the 2005 annual conference on European association of cognitive ergonomics,Chania:
3. Ackerman, J.(1962).A theory of style.Journal of aesthetics and art criticism,20(3),227-237.
4. Alben, L.(1996).Quality of experience: defining the criteria for effective interaction design.interactions,3(3),11-15.
5. Baird, R. N.(1993).Graphics of communication: methods, media and technology.New York:Harcourt brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
6. Bennett, A.(2006).Design studies: theory and research in graphic design.New York:Princeton Architectural Press.
7. Berlyne, D. E.(1971).Aesthetics and psychobiology.New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.
8. Berlyne, D. E.(1973).Pleasure, Reward, Preference: their nature, determinants, and role in behavior.New York:Academic Press.
9. Berlyne, D. E.(1978).Curiousity and Learning.Motivation and Emotion,2(2),97-175.
10. Bourdieu, P.(1987).Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education.New York:Greenwood Press.
11. Buchanan, R.(1995).Discovering design: explorations in design studies.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
12. Chen, K.,Owen, C. L.(1997).Form language and style description.Design Studies,18(3),249-274.
13. Chevrier, J.,Delorme, A.(1980).Aesthetic preferences: influence of perceptual ability, age and complexity of stimulus.Perceptual and Motor Skills,50(3),839-849.
14. Cleveland, P.(2005).How much visual power can a magazine take?.Design Studies,26(3),271-317.
15. Cleveland, P.(2004).The effect of technology on the development of magazine visual design style.Queensland:Griffith University.
16. Eco, U.(1976).A Theory of Semiotics.Bloomington, Indiana:Indiana University Press.
17. Farley, F. H.(Ed.),N., R. W.(Ed.)(1988).The foundations of aesthetics, art, and education.New York:Praeger.
18. Featherstone, M.(1991).Consumer culture and postmodernism.London:SAGE Publications.
19. Fechner, G.(1876).Vorschule der ästhetik (Preschool of aesthetics).Leipzig:Druck und Verlag von Breitkopf & Hartel.
20. Fechner, G.(1871).Zür experimentalen ästhetik (On experimental aesthetics).Leipzig:Hirzel.
21. Forlizzi, B. M. a. J.(2001).Proceedings of the 2004 Design & Emotion ConferenceProceedings of the 2004 Design & Emotion Conference,Ankara, Turkey:.
22. Forlizzi, J.(2002).From formalism to social significance in communication design.Design Issues,18(4),3-13.
23. Forty, A.(1986).Objects of desire.New York:Thames and Hudson.
24. Frascara, J.(2004).Communication design: principles, methods, and practice.New York:Allworth Press.
25. Frascara, J.(2002).Design and the social sciences: making connections.New York:Taylor.
26. Frascara, J.(1997).User-centred graphic design: mass communications and social change.London:Taylor & Francis Ltd..
27. Garrett, J. J.(2003).The elements of user experience: user-uentered design for the web.New York:American Institute of Graphic Arts.
28. Goguen, J. A.(2003).Semiotics, Compassion and Value-Centered Design.the Organizational Semiotics Workshop
29. Haig, A.(2002).Melbourne,Swinburne University of Technology.
30. Haig, A.,Whitfield, T. W. A.(2001).Predicting the aesthetic performance of web sites: what attracts people?.the Smart Graphics Symposium,New York:
31. Hall, R. H.,Hanna, P.(2004).The impact of web page text-background colour combinations on readability, retention, aesthetics and behavioural intention.Behaviour & Information Technology,23(3),183-195.
32. Hall, S.,Evans, J.(1999).Visual culture: the reader.London:Sage in association with the Open University.
33. Halliday, M. A. K.(1985).An introduction to functional grammar.A Hodder Arnold Publication.
34. Hebdige, D.(1988).Subculture: the meaning of style.London:Routledge.
35. Hembree, R.(2006).The complete graphic designer: a guide to understanding graphics and visual communication.Gloucester:Rockport.
36. Hussain, F.(1968).An experimental enquiry into the phenomena of 'aesthetic judgments' under varying time conditions.London:
37. Johnson, S.(1997).Interface culture: how new technology transforms the way we create and communicate.New York:HarperCollins.
38. Joseph, R. a. R.(1987).Multivariate data and analysis with reading.Mac Millan Publishing Company.
39. Kaiser, H.(1974).Analysis of factorial simplicity.Psychometrika,39,31-36.
40. Kant, I.(1987).Critique of judgment.Hackett:Werner Pluhar.
41. Kogan, N.(1994).On aesthetics and its origins: some psychobiological and evolutionary considerations.Social Research,61(1)
42. Kress, G. R.(2001).Multimodal discourse: the modes and media of contemporary communication.London:Arnold.
43. Kress, G.,Leeuwen, T. v.(1996).Reading images: the grammar of visual design.London:Routledge.
44. Kuppens, P.(2008).Individual differences in the relationship between pleasure and arousal.Journal of Research in Personality,42(4)
45. Lang, B.(Ed.)(1987).The Concept of style.New York:Cornell University Press.
46. Laurel, B.(2003).Design research: methods and perspectives.Cambridge:MIT Press.
47. Laviea, T.,Tractinsky, N.(2004).Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites.Int. J. Human-Computer Studies,60,269-298.
48. Leeuwen, Theo Van,Jewitt, Carey(2001).The handbook of visual analysis.London:SAGE.
49. Lindgaard, G.,Dudek, C.(2003).What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction?.Interacting with Computers,15(3),429-452.
50. Lindgaard, G.,Fernandes, G.,Dudek, C.,Brown, J.(2006).Attention web designers: you have fifty milliseconds to make a good first impression!.Behaviour and Information Technology,25,115-126.
51. Lindgaard, G.,Whitfield, T. W. A.(2004).Integrating aesthetics within an evolutionary and psychological framework.Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science,5(1),73-90.
52. Mahin, L.(2004).Powerpoint pedagogy.Business Communication Quarterly,67(2),219-222.
53. Mandel, T.(1997).The elements of user interface design.New York:Wiley.
54. Margolin, V.(1995).The idea of design.Cambridge:MIT Press.
55. Martindale, C.,Borkum, K. M. a. J.(1990).Aesthetic Preference: Anomalous Findings for Berlyne's Psychobiological Theory.The American Journal of Psychology,103(1),28.
56. Metros, S. E.(1994).The graphic designer's role.Interactions,1(3),28-40.
57. Miller, D.(1991).Material culture and mass consumption.Oxford:Blackwell.
58. Mullet, K.,Sano, D.(1995).Designing visual interfaces: communication oriented techniques.California:SunSoft Press.
59. Noble, I.(2005).Visual research: an Introduction to research methodologies in graphic design.London:AVA.
60. Norman, D. A.(2004).Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things.Basic Books.
61. North, A. C.,Hargreaves, D. J.(2000).Collative variables versus prototypicality.Empirical Studies of the Arts,18(1)
62. Olds, J.,Milner, P.(1954).Positive reinforcement produced by electrical stimulation of septal area and other regions of rat brain.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology,47,419-427.
63. Overall, J. E. a. K.,James, C.(1972).Applied multivariate analysis.New York:McGraw-Hill Book Co..
64. Pandir, M.,Knight, J.(2006).Homepage aesthetics: the search for preference factors and the challenges of subjectivity.Interacting with Computers,18(6),1351-1370.
65. Pateman, T.(1991).A guide to aesthetics, criticism and the arts in education.London:Falmer Press.
66. Petersen, M. G.,Iversen, O. S.,Krogh, P. G.,Ludvigsen, M.(2004).Aesthetic interaction: a pragmatist's aesthetics of interactive systems.2004 conference on Designing interactive systems
67. Pfaff, D.(2006).Brain arousal and information theory: neural and genetic mechanisms.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
68. Pickford, R. W.(1972).Psychology and visual aesthetics.London:Hutchinson Educational LTD.
69. Postrel, V.(2003).The substance of style.New York:Harper Collins.
70. Pye, D. W.(1978).The nature and aesthetics of design.London:Barrie&Jenkins.
71. Ree, J.(1999).I see a voice.London:Harper Collins.
72. Resnick, E.(2003).Design for communication: conceptual graphic design basics.Wiley.
73. Robertson, K.(2001).The sign in graphic design.LaTrobe University.
74. Roland, B.(1972).Mythologies.London:Vintage.
75. Saussure, F. d.,Harris, R.(Trans.)(1976).Course in General Linguistics.Duckworth.
76. Schenkman, B. N.,Jonsson, F. U.(2000).Aesthetics and preferences of web pages.Behaviour & information technology,19(5),367-377.
77. Schmid-Isler, S.(2000).The language of digital genres-a semiotic investigation of style and iconology on the world wide web.33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,Hawaii:
78. Schmidt, K. E.(2003).Web page aesthetics and performance: a survey and an experimental study.Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering? Theory, Applications and Practice, Las Vegas, Nevada,USA:
79. Schmitt, B.,Simonson, A.(1997).Marketing aesthetics: the strategic management of brands, identity, and image.New York:Free Press.
80. Shusterman, R.(1992).Pragmatist aesthetics: living beauty, rethinking art.Blackwell.
81. Silvia, P. J.(2005).Emotion responses to art: from collation and arousal to cognition and emotion.Review of General Psychology,9,342-357.
82. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M.,H., B.,E.v.d., W.(1996).The relationships among arousal potential, arousal and stimulus evaluation, and the moderating role of need for stimulation.International Journal of Research in Marketing,13(4),319-329.
83. Tarasewich, P.,Daniel, H. Z.,Griffin, H. E.(2001).Aesthetics and web site design.Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce,2(1),67-81.
84. Thorlacius, L.(2007).The Role of Aesthetics in Web Design.Nordicom Review,28,63-76.
85. Thorlacius, L.(2004).Aesthetics and function in web design.CADE2004 Web Proceedings of Computers in Art and Design Education Conference
86. Toms, E. G.(1999).Genre as interface metaphor: exploiting form and function in digital environments.32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
87. Toms, E. G.(2001).Recognizing digital genre.Bulletin of The American Society for Information Science and Technology,27(2)
88. Tractinsky, N.(1997).Aesthetics and apparent usability: empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues.CHI electronic publications.
89. Tractinsky, N.(2004).Toward the study of aesthetic in information technology.Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Information Systems
90. Tractinsky, N.,Cokhavi, A.,Kirschenbaum, M.(2004).Using ratings and response latencies to evaluate the consistency of immediate aesthetic perceptions of web pages.The Third Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS,Washington, D.C.:
91. Tractinsky, N.,Katz, A. S.,Ikar, D.(2000).What is beautiful is usable.Interacting with Computers,13,127-145.
92. Tractinsky, N.,Lavie, T.(2004).Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,60,269-298.
93. Whitfield, T. W. A.(1983).Predicting preference for familiar, everyday objects: an experimental confrontation between two theories of aesthetic behaviour.Journal of Environmental Psychology,3,221-237.
94. Whitfield, T. W. A.(2000).Beyond prototypicality: toward a categorical-motivation model of aesthetics.Empirical Studies of the Arts,18(1),1-11.
95. Whitfield, T. W. A.(2005).Aesthetics as pre-linguistic knowledge: a psychological perspective.Design Issues,21,3-17.
96. Whitfield, T. W. A.,Slatter, P. E.(1979).The effects of categorisation and prototypicality on aesthetic choice in a furniture selection task.British Journal of Psychology,70,65-75.

1. 劉仲矩、黃敬婷(2014)。網頁美學認知與網路忠誠關聯之研究：使用動機為干擾。行銷評論，11(3)，255-284。
2. 謝省民,陳俊宏,林舜青(2022)。大學學院網頁色彩之適配性研究－以台灣的亞洲大學為例。國立虎尾科技大學學報，36(4)，39-62。