INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DESIGNING PLEASURABLE PRODUCTS AND INTERFACES, DPPI09

13- 16 OCTOBER 2009, COMPIEGNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, COMPIEGNE, FRANCE

PRODUCT SYMBOLISM IN DESIGNING FOR USER

EXPERIENCE
ABSTRACT
This paper explores product symbolism as a type of user experience. Product symbolism refers to the
image of the product and associations related to it. The meanings that we attach to products have an
essential role in how we evaluate products and how we feel about them. In this paper, we review the
literature to clarify the concept of product symbolism and its nature. On the basis of the literature
review, we suggest four strategies for designing product symbolism: supporting identity and
personalization; making users associate with positive meanings, feelings, and memories; supporting
user values and social relatedness, and evaluating symbolic meaning. In addition, we developed a
projective technique for identifying the meanings that users attach to a product and describe the first
experiences of testing the technique and the evaluation strategy in an industrial case. The results show
that it is possible to evaluate product symbolism and develop it further to support positive user
experience.

Keywords: Product symbolism, symbolic meaning, user experience, intangible product properties

1 INTRODUCTION
In addition to offering practical functions, products often act as symbols for humans and provide
personal meaning. For example, an expensive car may symbolize achievement; the owner feels good
and important while driving the car and other people may think that he is successful in his job. This
kind of product symbolism has received considerable interest in market research and empirical studies
have shown that individuals, in certain conditions, do evaluate the symbolic meanings of products
when forming overall product preferences and attitudes [2]. For example, in Creusen and Schoormans’
[4] large qualitative study of 142 users, almost one half of the sample mentioned symbolic meaning as
a reason for product choice when they were asked to make a choice between two alternative products.
Allen [2] defines product symbolism as the image of the product, encompassing abstract ideas and
associations with the product, as well as beliefs about the kinds of people who use the product. As
human thinking is associative by nature, the empirical evidence indicates that a person may attach
almost any meaning to any object, but the object’s physical characteristics and the values attributed to
it in the culture seem to play a determining role [5, p. 87] . For example, in Csikszentmihalyi and
Rochberg-Halton’s [5] study of domestic objects, the symbolic meaning of TVs and stereos most often
related to the person’s self, while photos were specialized in preserving memories and sculptures in
embodying associations.
In this article, we argue that product symbolism should be taken into account in designing for user
experience. Currently, advertisers try to create symbolic associations with products, but product
developers could create real associations and create a positive user experience by design. After all, the
use logic and small details of the product may act as symbols for its users.
However, as Allen [2] points out, symbolism is a complex and obscure concept. Several researchers
use different terms, such as meaning [9, 24], personal meaning [10], symbolic meaning [11], product
meaning [1, 2], linking value [7], and symbolic qualities associated with products [8] to describe the
phenomenon. In addition, product symbolism is not a one-dimensional concept and, in order to design
for it, we need to understand the factors involved in it and how they can affect user experience. In this
paper, we review the literature to clarify the nature of product symbolism. On the basis of the literature
review, we suggest four strategies for designing product symbolism and describe the first experiences
of testing one of the strategies in an industrial case.

1.1 Intangible nature of user experience

As a face value, product symbolism seems to have a role in user experience. The concept of user
experience has evolved to take into account the experiential aspects of user-product interaction, such
as emotions, feelings, and meanings. As Cupchik and Hilscher [10] show on the basis of their

1
interview study people can feel a personalized connection to products as if they were involved in a
social relationship with them and they also suggest that symbolism is one of the ways of designing for
these positive experiences.
However, user experience is also a vague and multidimensional concept, and as yet there is not
even a commonly accepted definition of the term is still lacking. In addition, to understand how user
experience evolves and can be supported by design is a major challenge. According to Hassenzahl and
Tractinsky’s [15] model, user experience is a consequence of the user’s internal state, the
characteristics of the designed system, and the context in which the interaction occurs. Consequently,
the user experience is most commonly seen not as existing in product properties but as evolving in the
interaction between the user and the product [24].
Furthermore, Hassenzahl [13] distinguishes between pragmatic and hedonic quality in his user
experience model. Pragmatic quality refers to product attributes, which support instrumental goals and
the achievement of tasks. Hedonic quality attributes, on the other hand, support “be-goals” such as
personal growth or self-expression.
Similarly, several researchers in the consumer research field suggest, on the basis of empirical
evidence, that users evaluate a product’s utilitarian and symbolic meaning (see Allen [1]). Utilitarian
meaning stems from the underlying, essential function of a product and how well it satisfies
convenience, efficiency, and economic exchange. In contrast to utilitarian meaning, symbolic meaning
includes culturally shared and intangible attributes of a product.
In addition, Desmet and Heckert [11] identify three types of product experience: aesthetic
pleasure, attribution of meaning, and emotional response. They do not give an exact definition of the
attribution of meaning. However, they state that meaning is related to the personal or symbolic
significance of products or the possibility of assigning personality or other expressive characteristics
to products. In a similar vein, Vyas and van der Veer [25] compare user experience to the experience
of art and conceptualize users’ experience as the meaning or interpretations they construct during the
interaction.
In summary, user experience clearly represents something more than the instrumental and utility
aspects of the product. McCarthy and Wright [19] describe it as a subjective, constructive, holistic,
and spatio-temporal phenomenon [25]. Product symbolism seems to be an essential part of this
intangible nature of user experience.

2 THE CONCEPT OF PRODUCT SYMBOLISM

As mentioned, different terms have been used to describe the phenomenon of product symbolism and
here the main terms are reviewed.

2.1 Product meaning and symbolism

Product meaning is a well-established concept in consumer research. Allen [1, 2] provides a good
review of the related literature. As early as in 1923, Ogden and Richards defined product meaning as
the relationship between mind, object, and word. According to Allen [2], there have been various
approaches offering an explanation of the relationship, but in most of them, product meaning can be
public or subjective, suffused with affectivity, and either linguistic or non-linguistic. Products have
also been seen as signs that consumers interpret by giving them meaning [21].
As already mentioned, meaning can be distinguished as utilitarian or symbolic and here our
particular interest is in symbolic meaning, which is represented in intangible attributes. Allen [2] states
that a group of individuals has a tendency to make similar inferences about a product, suggesting that
symbolic meaning is culturally shared. Symbols are formed by cultural principles, which can be
norms, values, or social categories. For example, an American flag may symbolize freedom or
conservative American (a social category) [2]. However, different subgroups may have totally
different ways of creating symbolic meaning.
Allen [2] reviews the literature on product symbolism and defines it as the image of the product,
encompassing abstract ideas and associations with the product, as well as beliefs about the kinds of
people who use the product. According to the psychological and sociological literature, the main
reason why individuals pay attention to object symbolism is that they want to maintain, enhance, and
express their self-concept. The term ‘self-concept’ refers both to a person’s identity and ideal image of
him/herself. Thus, product symbolism can, in Allen’s [2] words, be used to create and enhance their
self-definition and the literature gives examples of how symbolic meanings have been used to

2
compensate for low self-esteem and lack of experience in playing a particular social role. Mugge et al.
[20] review literature showing that people tend to develop a stronger attachment to products that are
used to express and maintain a personal and unique identity. In addition to identity, Allen [1,2] shows
by his survey studies that users form product preferences to some extent by evaluating whether their
values are represented in product meanings. For example, users’ preference for achievement value was
associated with a preference for larger family cars and that for security with a preference for red meat
[1].

2.2 Linking value

Cove [7] analyzes humans and consumption behavior from a sociological point of view. In sociology,
a new tribalism is seen as characterizing postmodernity and Cove [7] argues that to satisfy their desire
for communities, modern individuals seek products and services less for their use value than for their
linking value. Linking value arises when a product facilitates and supports communion by providing a
site, an emblem, the support for integration or recognition, etc.
Furthermore, Cove [7] states that “the postmodern individual can build an identity for themselves
with cultural symbols and references (plays, exhibitions, films, books), humanitarian references (the
French Doctors, Bosnia, Somalia), but also sporting references (the complete outfit of the OM
supporter), and, in fact, all possible references”.
Thus, linking value can be interpreted as one kind of meaning. It refers to product properties that
cause users to experience a feeling of communion.

2.3 Product expressiveness

In industrial design, symbolic meaning is often interpreted as being a part of a product’s appearance or
expressive characteristics. For example, van Rompay [23] interprets symbolic meaning as a synonym
for the product’s perceived expression and he provides an overview of studies accounting for the
relationships between the formal features and the symbolic meanings. First, he reviews the ways in
which an object can express meanings. For example, the bodily expression (position, movement) of
the product can be associated with emotions, heaviness, or freedom. Second, he reviews factors
affecting the ways in which a person constructs meanings. The most essential psychological finding
may be that people use their existing knowledge and draw implicit comparisons between product
categories or between products and other phenomena. Designers can then use metaphors and analogies
in order to promote a certain kind of user experiences.

2.4 Experience of meaning

Desmet and Hekkert [11] consider meaning to be one of the three components of product experience.
They consider meaning as non-physical human-product interaction, which refers to fantasizing about,
remembering, or anticipating usage. Thus, interpretation, memory retrieval, and associations are used
in attaching meaning to products and assessing the personal or symbolic significance of products.
Some hints are also given that, in practice, we recognize metaphors, personality, or other expressive
characteristics. The examples of experiences of meaning given by Desmet and Hekkert [11] are luxury
and attachment. The experience of luxury represents the symbolic value of a comfortable lifestyle that
is associated with particular consumer products. The experience of attachment is represented by
products that have some profound and sustained meaning for us.
Table 1 summarizes the examples of experiences of meaning reviewed and described by Desmet
and Hekkert [11].

Table 1. Examples of experiences of meaning discussed in [11].

Example of meaning Product properties
Luxury Material, processes, packaging, distribution, and promotion
that exceed the level of standard products that allow for
pleasure.
Attachment Product personality similar to that of the user [11]
Nostalgia A teddy bear [9]

3
Summary
All in all, product symbolism seems to be an essential part of user experience and the different
definitions and fields of research provide complementary views of the concept. Product symbolism is
something intangible and subjective, but, at the same time, culturally shared. Several terms and
definitions are used to describe it, but Allen’s [2] definition of product symbolism seems to combine
views and provide the best description of the nature of the phenomenon. As mentioned, Allen [2]
defines product symbolism as the image of the product, encompassing abstract ideas and associations
with the product, as well as beliefs about the kinds of people who use the product.
Consumer behavior research shows that the main reason why product symbolism is important to
users is that they want to maintain, enhance, and express their identity and ideal image of themselves.
In addition, it has been shown that meaning arises when products support user values [2]. The
sociological literature suggests that the goal can also be a feeling of communion [7]. Industrial design
suggests that a product can express feelings and ideas to the user or that meaning can arise through
memory retrieval and associations [9].

3 FACTORS IN PRODUCT SYMBOLISM

In order to design for product symbolism, we need to identify the factors involved in it or different
ways in which of it is manifested. In addition to consumer research, some researchers have performed
interview studies and user self-reports in order to understand how the personal meaning is evoked and
what the factors behind it are.
Cupchik and Hilscher [10] interviewed eight professional designers and eight graduate students in
order to understand why they found design objects ‘meaningfully and emotionally connected’. On the
basis of qualitative analysis and factor analysis, they identified four factors. First, people can feel a
personalized connection to products, as if they were involved in a social relationship with them.
Second, products can be idealized for their uniqueness or the prestige of their designer. Third, products
can provide an occasion for meaningful self-exploration and the expression of a personal identity.
Fourth, products can provide meaning through metaphors and symbolism.
In addition, Csikszentmihalyi and Rochber-Halton [5] asked people to identify those objects in
their home that were special to them and then the respondents were asked to give their reasons why the
objects were special. Those reasons were then categorized into meaning categories. The most
frequently mentioned meaning categories were related to self, immediate family, and experiences.
Then, memories, association, intrinsic qualities, style, personal values, and utilitarian reasons were
mentioned. Other people, such as relatives, in-laws, friends, and heroes were also mentioned.
Furthermore, Richins [22] used a similar approach, but she first conducted a survey to identify the
private meanings of valued possessions and then she used a card sorting method to identify the public
meaning of the objects mentioned in the survey. In her first study, she identified the following factors:
utilitarian, enjoyment, interpersonal ties, identity, financial aspects, and appearance-related. The
results of her second study show that there are some differences between public and private meanings.
Status or prestige was present in public meanings but was not represented in the content analysis of
private meanings. When the respondents evaluated their personal meanings they mentioned the item’s
appearance or financial worth instead of status or prestige. Richins [22] suggests that the respondents
declined to disclose the status or prestige for social desirability reasons. On the other hand, public
meanings did not distinguish between two forms of symbolic meaning – that associated with
interpersonal relationships and that associated with personal identity. All in all, public meanings tend
to be more simplistic or less nuanced than private meanings. Thus, it looks as if symbolic meaning is a
partly cultural, shared one and partly private and experiential.
In summary, the findings of these interview studies are similar to the results of consumer research
and support them. For example, supporting identity and self-expression were again identified as being
important to users. On the other hand, some new categories are also identified. Some of the categories
relate to utilitarian, enjoyment, or financial aspects. However, users may not be able to report all the
causes of their satisfaction, but instead they report consequences. For example, Cupchik and Hilscher
[10] identified a personalized connection as a reason for symbolic meaning. It may be that users
ascribed human characteristics to the product in the first place and this led to satisfaction with it. On
the other hand, the user’s experience of attachment is also described as developing over the course of
time, as a result of multiple, recurring interactions between the user and the product (see [20]).

4
 Furthermore, Richins’ [22] study revealed an important new factor related to status or prestige that
is not mentioned in self-reports for social desirability reasons. Product meanings are a way of sending
hidden messages to others. The messages may help in gaining status in others’ eyes or social approval
as the user identifies him/herself as belonging to a certain reference group. For example, by using
professional-looking tools, a user feels more professional him-/herself [3].
All in all, the identified factors of symbolic meaning are summarized in Figure 1.

Aesthetic pleasure
Memory retrieval and associations
Emotional
User experience response Support for user identity or status

Symbolic meaning Beliefs about the kinds of people who use

the product
Support for user values e.g. feeling of
relatedness or communion

Figure 1. Symbolic meaning and its factors as a part of user experience

4 DESIGNING FOR PRODUCT SYMBOLISM

Design is often represented as a process of communication between designers and users, in which
products mediate between designers’ intentions to communicate and consumers’ interpretations [8].
However, products are interpreted in different ways by different people in different contexts. Thus, the
intangible product symbolism in particular is challenging to design (cf. [4, 20]).
The whole product (cf. [3]), the product’s properties, or its origin, producer or brand can be
symbolic signs expressing something. On the basis of the literature review and the identified reasons
for user satisfaction, we suggest four strategies for designing product symbolism.

4.1 The first strategy: supporting identity and personalization

Maintaining, enhancing, and expressing identity and an ideal image of oneself were identified as being
the main reason why symbolic meaning is important for users. For example, a pink outfit states that a
child is a girl or professional symbols (e.g. a briefcase or suits) can compensate for business students’
low grades [2]. Thus, designing the product to support the user’s identity is important. For example, a
particular user group may choose a certain font or picture as their style. By knowing the target user
group, this may be possible, but usually there are several different user groups and it may also be
challenging to anticipate users’ reactions.
The easiest way of designing product symbolism is to incorporate into a design the possibility of
users being able to personalize their products themselves. For example, Boztepe [3] describes how
American users tend to decorate their refrigerators with family photos etc. As Mugge et al. [20, p. 434]
point out, the more involved a person is in personalization, the more effort he/she will invest in the
product, and the more personal and self-expressive the product is likely to become. Thus,
personalization should not to be restricted to predetermined alternatives but, on the other hand, it
should not be too complicated either.

4.2 The second strategy: making users associate with positive meanings, feelings,
and memories
Often, symbolism is connected to form, esthetics, and physical qualities, but it seems that almost any
product property can be interpreted to provide meaning. The particular reason for this is the
associative nature of the meaning. Thus, any property that brings associations to mind provides
meaning. The property can make the user remember something important through association [cf. 12,
18, 22]. This kind of meaning can be personal or culturally shared. For example, souvenirs remind
people of places, holidays, and their feelings at the time they were bought.
When designing for user experience, the particularly interesting possibilities for creating associations
by means of product properties are:
The metaphor of the product. Metaphors may help users to understand the nature of the product and, at
the same time, metaphors also may bring positive associations from the outside world; cf. [9].

5
Product character, style, and beauty. Hassenzahl [14] defines a product character as a bundle of
attributes, such as innovative, comprehensible, or professional. This is near to what we could call the
style or image of the product. Sometimes, a certain character or style can be formed unintentionally by
the way in which it is used. For example, the way in which a mobile phone is used can bring to mind a
computer and the negative meanings and feelings associated with it. In addition, beauty supports
communication of the user’s identity [14, p. 329].
The functionality of the product. The functions provided tell the user what the product’s target group
is. This is probably the hidden reason for including unnecessary functions in the product, as it may
make the user feel more professional, powerful, and important.
Ease of use. Not only is the functionality per se important, but so is the feeling associated with use.
The complexity of a product may make the user feel stupid, which does not support his/her ideal self-
concept. For example, if the product is easy to use, the user can feel more effective, too. Even if a user
attaches a positive meaning to a product, the actual use can bring up feelings that are associated with
other meanings.
The visual and audio content of the product. The physical appearance and tangibility of the product
play an important role in providing meaning. In addition, the visual contents of the screens – pictures,
styles etc. – and, on the other hand, sounds are important. The products and screens may include
pictures that are symbols in themselves or the other visual aspects may remind the user of something.
The texts included in the product. Words are symbols in themselves and products include words in
their names and user interfaces. The selection of words gives meaning and provides different
interpretations of the target group for the product. In addition, stories may be involved in products.
Stories may say something about the origins, birth, and meaning of the product.

4.3 The third strategy: supporting user values and social relatedness
Allen [2] shows by his empirical studies that users form product preferences by evaluating whether
their values are represented in product meaning. Kujala and Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila [17] provide a
literature review of user values. User values do not consist only of moral values, but many kinds of
values, such as social, emotional, or hedonistic. The importance of the specific values depends on user
and context. However, social values seem to be particularly important to users and this category was
identified in Richins’ [22] and Csikszentmihalyi and Rochber-Halton’s [5] studies as being an
important explanation for valued possessions. People want to be in contact with others, belong to
groups, and demonstrate their interpersonal ties.

4.4 The fourth strategy: evaluating symbolic meaning in order to develop it

One additional and complementary approach is to evaluate how users interpret the existing symbolic
meaning of the product. The idea is to get feedback and at least, try to eliminate negative associations
and meanings and support positive ones. For example, Creusen and Schoormans [4, pp. 78-79] suggest
testing with consumers, although they admit that people have difficulties in specifying their sometimes
maybe even subconscious reactions and giving advice as to how aesthetic and symbolic value can be
improved.

4.5 The way to start

Symbolic meaning is challenging to design for as it is hard to anticipate other people’s reactions and
the designer and user may attach different meanings to a product. Thus, the fourth strategy of
evaluating the product’s symbolic meaning seems to be the easiest way to start.
Vyas and van der Veer [25] used an Explication Interview to get users to reflect and talk about
their feelings, emotions, values, and meanings. However, the questions they used were very general in
the way that they asked users to describe their usage and expectations. Thus, a more specific method is
needed to identify both explicit and implicit aspects of product meaning that users may find difficult to
report. To respond to the challenges, we developed a projective technique for identifying the meanings
users attach to a product. The technique was used in an industrial case, which is reported in the next
section.

5 CASE: EVALUATING SYMBOLIC MEANING

Evaluating symbolic meaning with a sentence completion technique was tested in practice in an
industrial case. The goal was to see if the developed sentence completion technique is suitable for

6
identifying how users interpret the meaning of an existing product. The study was performed in Polar
Electro, a company producing different products supporting fitness and sports. Polar has 21
subsidiaries globally and manages a distribution network supplying over 35,000 retail outlets in 80
countries. The goal of the study was to evaluate the user experience and symbolic meaning of an
existing product, the RS200 heart rate monitor, in order to get ideas for improving it. The participants
and results are presented in a slightly summarized form in order to avoid confidentiality issues.

5.1 Participants
An invitation to participate in the study was sent to 99 owners of the RS200 heart rate monitor
randomly selected from a customer database. The users were given a week’s time to respond and those
who filled in the questionnaire were promised that they would be entered into a lottery with a product
as the prize. The response rate was about 37% and 37 users filled in the questionnaire.

5.2 Questionnaire
The questionnaire consisted of background information questions and sentence completion tasks.
Sentence completion is a projective psychological technique that is rather commonly used in consumer
research [16]. It has also been used for identifying user values for product development purposes [6].
The strength of the technique is that respondents use their own words to describe their situation, thus
giving more spontaneous and honest answers compared to traditional questionnaires [16]. Thus, it
could be particularly well suited to evaluating symbolic meaning, which may also be partly
subconscious. In addition to describing their own reactions, users were also asked to describe the
typical user of the product, as Richins [22] shows that general status is easier to report than to admit
personally.
Sentences were developed to reveal general values related to training and the types of symbolic
meaning associated with the product. The respondents were instructed that there were no correct
answers and that they should complete the sentences rather quickly on the basis of what first came into
their mind. Examples of the sentences:
• In relation to sports, I dream…
• The best of my training experiences was…
• The RS200 brings to my mind…
• To me the RS200 means…
• The RS200 fits best…
• The appearance of the RS200 is…
• Compared to other products, the RS200 is…
• The typical owner of an RS200 is…
• The RS200 does not fit…
• The image that the RS200 gives of its user…
• The style of the RS200…
• The feeling the RS200 arouses…
• The RS200 makes me…
• When I use the RS200, I feel myself…
• When I use the RS200, other people think…

This kind of sentence completion questionnaire is qualitative in nature and the goal was to identify
what kind of meaning the users associate with the product. The answers were first put into a table, so
that it was possible to see all the answers given by a single respondent and, at the same time, compare
the answers given by different respondents. After that the answers were categorized according to basic
themes based on either a single question or several questions. If the same meaning or a very similar
meaning was mentioned by several users, the percentage of the users reporting the same meaning was
counted.

5.3 Results
The results were summarized in twelve slides for company use. All in all, the 37 users seemed to have
a consistent and rather uniform idea of the symbolic meaning of the product. The users used almost as
many different wordings to describe meaning as there were respondents, but they were mostly very

7
similar. For example, Figure 2 provides a summary of how the respondents described a typical user of
the RS200. A typical user was most often associated to be very active and sporty. 39% of the
respondents used one or the other of these words and many other answers were related to this view. A
few answers described positive characteristics such as awareness of quality and being wealthy. One
answer described the typical user as being interested in technology, which probably means that the
product is rather technology-oriented, which can be negative association to a certain user group. One
woman respondent answered that the typical user is a man, and later the same respondents described
the product that it is not very feminine. Thus, the product is not supporting the female identity.

Figure 2. The users’ evaluation of the characteristics of the typical user of the RS200 heart
rate monitor
The meaning of the product gave rise to less homogeneous answers (Figure 3). The meaning was
partly very positive; the product was seen in Cupchik and Hilscher’s [10] words as being very
personalized. Although the product is only a measuring device, it was seen as a partner, motivator,
coach, and supporter. On the other hand, some users found the product to be just a tool. In addition,
both positive and negative attributes were connected with the product. Two respondents considered the
product to be easy to use or clear, and four respondents stated in different wordings that it was difficult
to use. One woman mentioned that the product does not fit small people and this may be the reason
why it did not feel feminine either.
In the end of the questionnaire, users were asked to give open feedback to product development
and they were enthusiastic to do that. Respondents’ open feedback focused on functionality and only
8% of the answers were related to the appearance and style of the product. On the other hand, in
sentence completion, 37% of the answers were related to the appearance and style.

Figure 3. The meaning of RS200 heart rate monitor to users

8
5.4 Summary and implications for design
The examples of the sentence completion results provide preliminary evidence that the tool provide
useful information on how users interpret the symbolic meaning of products. In addition to those two
example figures, we received information on user goals, values, feelings, and dreams and feedback on
the quality, style, and appearance of the product.
The results of the sentence completion tool are qualitative by nature, but help designers to
understand how users see their products and how the symbolic meaning of the product can be
improved. This feedback information can be utilized in design by supporting the positive meanings
and correcting features that create negative reactions. For example, in the current case, users
considered the heart rate monitor to be a coach, motivator, and partner and new ways of making the
heart rate monitor to give even more advice, encouragement, and social support could be considered.
On the other hand, a few users saw the monitor as resembling a computer and being difficult to use, so
one of the design goals could be developing the monitor in such a way that it looks more human-
oriented.
The experience of evaluating product meaning shows that users seem to have a consistent and
common view of meaning. However, also individual users may also have personal meanings that are
not commonly shared. Users are different and that is why some of them may consider ease-of-use
feelings and others very different feelings. However, this evaluation provided feedback only from
existing users and not, for example, those people who did not buy this product. To broaden the view, it
would be good also to identify the reactions of those people who do not have the product.

6 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we review the literature on product symbolism and combine results from the different
branches of research. Defining the concept of product symbolism and identifying its factors is the first
step in making it and, along with that, user experience, more concrete and more beneficial for
consideration in design. As the literature review shows, to some extent there is empirical evidence for
understanding the nature of product symbolism and its relation to user satisfaction. On the basis of
knowledge as to why product symbolism is important for users, we provide preliminary design
strategies to develop positive product meanings.
One of the most promising design strategies is to evaluate product symbolism before a product is
launched. Design produces meanings anyway and thus, the first step is to identify how users interpret
the new product. Thus, negative meanings can be eliminated and positive ones further supported by
design. The industrial case shows that the sentence completion approach seems to work in identifying
the product meaning, which may not be so easy to report otherwise. In addition, users actually seem to
have rather a consistent view of the symbolic meaning and the examples given of the results
demonstrate that this information is useful in design. On the other hand, those who are not users of the
product may attach different symbolic meanings to the product. Thus, in order to get new users, it may
be useful to study non-users as well. However, more products need to be studied to deeply understand
the nature of product symbolism in design.
In summary, the concept of product symbolism appears promising in explaining the experiential
factors of product use and designing for better user experience. The presented approach of identifying
how users interpret the current product meaning is the first step in designing for product symbolism.
Of course, product symbolism is only one part of user experience, but it seems to be a particularly
important factor influencing users’ emotions and product attachment [cf. 19].

REFERENCES
[1] Allen, M.W. Human values and product symbolism: Do consumers form product preference by
comparing the human values symbolized by a product to the human values that they endorse?
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2002, 32, 12, 2475-2501.
[2] Allen, M.W. A dual –process model of the influence of human values on consumer choice. evista
Psicologia: Organizações e Trabalho (Journal Psychology: Organizations and Work): Special
Issue: Consumer Behavior, 2006, 6, 1, 15-49.
[3] Boztepe, S. Toward a framework of product development for global markets: A user-value-based
approach. Design Studies, 2007, 28, 5, 513-533.
[4] Creusen, M.E.H. and Schoormans, J.P.L. The different roles of product appearance in consumer
choice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2005, 22, 63-81.

9
[5] Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton, E. The meaning of things, Domestic symbols and the
self, 1981 (Cambridge University Press, UK).
[6] Cockton, G., Kujala, S., Nurkka, S. and Hölttä, T. Supporting worth mapping with sentence
completion. To be published in Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT09: Human-Computer
Interaction.
[7] Cove, B. Community and consumption, towards a definition of the “linking value” of product or
services. European Journal of Marketing, 1997, 31, ¾, 297-316.
[8] Crilly, N., Good, D., Matravers, D., and Clarkson, P.J. Design as communication: exploring the
validity and utility of relating intention to interpretation. Design Studies, 2008, 29,425-457.
[9] Crilly, N., Moultrie, J. and Clarkson, P.J. Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain
in product design. Design Studies, 2004, 25, 547-577.
[10] Cupchik, G.C. and Hilscher, M.C. Holistic perspectives on the design of experience. In
Schifferstein, H.N.J. and Hekkert, P. (eds.) Product experience, 2008 (Elsevier: USA).
[11] Desmet, P. and Hekkert, P. Framework for product experience. International Journal of Design,
2007, 1, 1, 2007 57-66.
[12] Govers, P.C.M. and Mugge, R. ‘I love my Jeep, because it’s tough like me’, The effect of
product-personality congruence on product attachment. In Conference on Design and Emotion,
Ankara, METU, 2004, pp. 1-14.
[13] Hassenzahl, M. The thing and I: Understanding the relationship between user and product. In M.
Blythe, C. Overbeeke, A.f. Monk and P.C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From Usability to
Enjoyment. 2003 (Kluwer: Dordrecht), pp. 31-42.
[14] Hassenzahl, M. The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Human-
Computer Interaction, 2004, 19, 2004, 319-349.
[15] Hassenzahl, M. and Tractinsky, N. User Experience: A research agenda. Behaviour and
Information Technology, 2006, 25, 91-97.
[16] Hoyer, W.D., MacInnis, D. J. Consumer Behavior, 2007 (Houghton Mifflin Company, New
York, USA).
[17] Kujala, S. and Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. Value of Information Systems and Products:
Understanding the Users' Perspective and Values. JITTA: Journal of Information Technology
Theory & Application, 2009, 9, 4, 23-39.
[18] Mahlke, S. Aesthetic and symbolic qualities as antecedents of overall judgments of interactive
products. In Bryan-Kinns, N., Blandford, A., Cruzon, P. & Nigay, L. (Eds.) People and
Computer XX – Engage, 2006 (London: Springer), pp. 57-64.
[19] McCarthy, J. and Wright, P. Technology as Experience, 2004 (MIT-Press, Cambridge, MA).
[20] Mugge, R., Schoormans, J.P.L. and Schifferstein, H.N.J. Product attachment: Design strategies to
stimulate the emotional bonding to products. In Schifferstein, H.N.J. and Hekkert, P. (eds.)
Product experience, 2008 (Elsevier: USA), pp. 425-440.
[21] Norman, D. Emotional Design, 2004 (Basic Books: NY, USA).
[22] Richins, M. Valuing things: The public and private meanings of possessions. Journal of
Consumer Research, December 1994, 21, 504-521.
[23] van Rompay, T.J.L. Product expression: Bridging the gap between the symbolic and the concrete.
In Schifferstein, H.N.J. and Hekkert, P. (eds.) Product experience, 2008 (Elsevier: USA).
[24] Russo, B. and Hekkert, P. On the experience of love: The underlying principles. In DPPI, ACM
2007, pp. 12-19.
[25] Vyas, D. and van der Veer, G.C. Experience and meaning: Some underlying concepts and
implications for design. In the 13th European conference on cognitive ergonomics: trust and
control in complex socio-technical systems, 2006, pp. 81-91.

10