Emotion through expression
Designing mobile telephones with an emotional fit
l P.M.A. Desmet
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Department of Industrial Design
p.m.a.desmet@io.tudelft.nl
l Key words: Emotional response, product expression, research method
Introduction
Affective responses are important components of
product experiences. Emotions elicited by consumer
products influence both the decision to purchase a
product and the pleasure of using it after the purchase.
For designers it is important to design products that
‘fit’ the emotions of the users, that is, products that
elicit the emotions that the user would like to
experience. Although these emotions are elementary,
they are troublesome for designers because it is
difficult to get a grip on this so-called emotional fit.
An explanation is that emotions are –in most cases-
not elicited by the product as such, but by meanings
yielded from the product. In those cases, the emotion
is not elicited by tangible product attributes but by
intangible -highly personal- construals of the product.
A designer cannot merely depend on his own
construals because there is no guarantee that they
resemble the construals of the users. Hence, in order to
create the required emotional fit, the designer shou ld
be able to discuss the emotional impact of his design
with the intended users. However, it seems difficult, if
not impossible, to discuss emotional responses with
consumers because they find it very difficult to
express what they feel and why they feel it.
This paper presents an approach to include the user in
the design process in order to obtain an emotional fit
between the product expression and the ensuing
emotional construals. This approach is established in a
design project of mobile telephones. The point of
departure is the emotional response elicited by existing
telephones. The aim of the project is to design mobile
telephones that elicit emotional responses that are
more desired than the emotions elicited by existing
designs 1 . The first step in the approach is to measure
the emotional responses elicited by existing telephone
models.
Emotional responses to mobile telephones
Traditionally, scholars use verbal measures to measure
emotional responses. Contrary to this approach, I posit
that emotion measures should avoid using words. First,
emotions are difficult to verbalize, especially the type
of subtle, low intensity emotions elicited by products.
Second, asking subjects to describe their emotional
response will require cognitive involvement, which
may influence the measurement (Desmet, Hekkert &
Jacobs, 1999). For the current application a non-verbal
self-report measure was developed: the ‘emocards’.
The emocards are based on the dimensions
 ‘pleasantness’ and ‘arousal’. In psychology, these two
dimensions of emotions are most accepted (e.g.,
Schlosberg, 1952). Based on the two dimensions,
Russell created a ‘circumplex of emotions’ (Russell,
1980). The facial expressions of the 16 emocards
represent eight distinct places on the circumplex
(figure 1).
1
1
8 2
arousal
0 7 3
6 4
-1
-1 0 1
pleasantness
Figure 1. Circumplex of emotions and the emocards.
Each octant of the circumplex is represented by both a
male and a female face (for more discussion on the
development of the emocards, see Desmet, Tax &
Overbeeke, 2000). In an experiment, subjects can
express their emotional responses to products by
pointing out the card that best indicates their response.
To assess the emotional responses elicited by
mobile telephones, an emocard experiment was
conducted with 12 mobile telephone users. Eight
telephones that were on the market at that time served
as stimuli (see figure 2). These models were felt to
cover the diversity in design of available telephones at
that time. The emocards were randomly spread out on
the table in front of the subject. After seeing all
models, the subjects were asked to point out two
emocards for each telephone. Subsequently, they were
asked to point out one emocard that best expresses
their most favored emotional response regarding
mobile telephones. Furthermore, in an open interview,
the results were discussed with the subject. In this
discussion, the subject was asked to comment on his
choice of emocards.
St-H St-A
St-G St-B
St-F St-C
St-E St-D
Figure 2. Eight existing mobile telephones.
The results show that the preferred emotional
responses vary between subjects. Based on this
variation, the subjects are separated into two groups of
six subjects each. The first group, labeled as ‘CALM’,
prefers a calm-pleasant emotional response, whereas
the second group, labeled as ‘EXCITED’, prefers an
excited-pleasant response. Apparently, the EXCITED
like to be aroused by a mobile telephone, whereas the
CALM clearly do not. The emotional responses to the
telephones and the preferred emotional responses of
both the CALM and the EXCITED are shown in
figure 3. The figure shows the average scores of the
telephones. The white dots represent the average
scores of the CALM, whereas the black dots represent
the average scores of the EXCITED. The figure
illustrates that the emotional responses of the CALM
differ from the emotional responses of the EXCITED.
By means of example, the CALM experience a
pleasant-excited emotion when looking at model St-G,
whereas the EXCITED experience an unpleasant-calm
response. The differences between the responses of the
CALM and the EXCITED vary between the
telephones. The responses to Model St-D, for example,
differ less than the responses to model St-C. The
squares represent the emotional responses that the
users would like to experience when looking at a
mobile telephone.
1
1 St-A
2 St-B
3 St-C
7 4 St-D
1 5 St-E
2 P
6 St-F
5 7 St-G
0
6 8 St-H
8
4 P Preferred
arousal
3 vulnerable). Likewise, if a product is appraised as
calm
-1 excited
-1 pleasantness 0 1
Figure 3. Emotions elicited by the eight telephones
The goal of the design project is to design a telephone
that elicits an emotional response that is located in the
circumplex closer to the desired emotional response
than the existing models. Nevertheless, the results of
the emocar d study show that two new models should
be designed; one for the CALM and one for the
EXCITED. Hence, in this project, two telephones are
designed. The design strategy adopted in this paper is
based on a model of product emotions that focuses on
the role of the product in emotional responses.
Product emotions
Desmet and Hekkert (2000) propose a model of
product emotions based on a cognitive structure
developed by Ortony, Clore and Collins (1988).
According to the model, a product elicits an emotion
when it is appraised either as conflicting or
corresponding with a personal concern (in which the
appraisal is an automatic non-intellectual evaluation).
Our concerns are more or less stable preferences for
certain states of the world; they are our personal
motives in life (Frijda 1986). The model describes
three levels of emotional responses, based on three
types of emotional concerns:
1. Goals (the things we want to see happen),
2. Standards (how we believe things ought to be),
3. Attitudes (our dispositional liking and disliking).
If a product is appraised as conflicting with a concern,
we experience an unpleasant emotion (e.g., bored,
corresponding with a concern, we experience a
pleasant emotion (e.g., attracted to, fascinated).
Although mobile telephones can elicit emotions on all
three levels, for clearness’ sake, the design project
described in the currents paper focuses specifically on Goals regarding mobile telephones
the first type of concerns, that is ‘goals’. Goal The goals of both the EXCITED and the CALM were
emotions result from the inclination of people to assessed with a discussion technique
anticipate on the future possession of a product once named ‘laddering’. This technique was developed by
they see one. An important basis of this anticipation is Hinkle (1965) and elaborated by Reynolds and
the product expression. Products express through their Gutman (1988). The results of these discussions show
design what goals they will fulfil. A car for example, that the CALM have different goals and corresponding
can elicit desire if it expresses that it is safe and expressions than the EXCITED. Table 1 shows these
consequently is appraised as corresponding with the goals and expressions.
goal ‘safety’. Figure 4 shows the process of emotion
eliciting based on goals. Table 1. Concerns and corresponding expressions.
CALM EXCITED
Concerns To avoid stress To impress
To avoid attracting To be free
expression
attention
Expressions Sober Advanced
Professional Sophisticated
product Friendly Professional
Easy in use Pleasant
emotion appraisal
Secure Cheerful
person Businesslike Playful
Inviting Distinctive

goals
A mobile telephone with a sober and professional
(etcetera) expression will correspond with the goals ‘to
avoid stress’ and ‘to avoid attracting attention’ of the
CALM. Their emotional response to this telephone
Figure 4. Emotions elicited based on goals
will be calm-pleasant (see figure 3). Similarly, a

The first step in the design project was to find the telephone with an advanced and sophisticated

emotional responses elicited by existing mobile (etcetera) expression will correspond w ith the goals ‘to

telephones. The second step is to determine what goals impress’ and ‘to be free’ of the EXCITED. Their

mobile telephone users have and what product corresponding response will be excited-pleasant. The

expression will be anticipated as meeting these goals. expression profiles are visualized in two collages; one
that expresses the CALM profile, and one that
expresses the EXCITED profile.
 CALM Helix
Logica

Figure 6. Two of the designed models.

EXCITED

Feedback study
Figure 7 shows the emotional response to the designed
models. This figure results from an emocard study
with 12 subjects from the CALM segment, and 12
subjects from the EXCITED segment.
Besides the responses to the designs, figure 7 also
Figure 5. Collages of the CALM and EXCITED expressions.
depicts the responses to the existing models and the
preferred responses. The figure shows that model
Based on the collages, the author designed four mobile
Helix is positioned closest to the preferred emotional
telephones. From roughly 80 design sketches, 30
response of the EXCITED. Therefore, it can be
promising ideas were selected. These 30 ideas were
concluded that Helix elicits an emotional response that
worked out into form concepts. Based on the collages
is preferred over the emotions elicited by the other
and the verbal expressions of table 1, two of the
models. On the other hand, model Logic a is not
concepts were chosen: one concept for the EXCITED
positioned most close to the preferred emotional
and one for the CALM. Subsequently, the concepts
response of the CALM. The existing model St-C is
were each detailed into two telephone designs 2 . Two
slightly closer to the preferred emotional response.
of these four models are presented in figure 6. The
Therefore, it can be concluded that Logica does not
model designed for the CALM is named ‘Logica’,
elicit a more preferable emotional response than the
whereas the model designed for the EXCITED is
existing model St-C.
named ‘Helix’.
 0
-3 -2 -1 1 2 3 percieved
1 1 St-A sober striking expression
of the calm
2 St-B professional amateurish
3 St-C friendly friendly
easy in use gruff
4 St-D
secure doubtful
7 5 St-E Logica
businesslike informal
6 St-F Helix
inviting reserved
2 7 St-G
1 8 St-H
Helix 5 P
0 P Preferred 0
4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 percieved
8 calm advanced old-fashioned expression
6 sophisticated ungainly of the excited
arousal

Logica
excited professional amateurish
pleasant annoying
3 cheerful gloomy Logica
playful dull
Helix
distinctive ordinary

-1

Figure 8. Perceived expressions of model Logica and Helix.

-1 pleasantness 0 1

Figure 7. Emotional responses elicited by the designs. Discussion

The expression of model Logica offers an explanation
for the rather poor effect of model Logica. The
perceived expressions were measured with semantic
differentials. The differentials are bipolar seven-point
scales of the expressions (see table 1) and their
opposites. The subjects were instructed to score the
scales for both Logica and Helix. The average scores
are shown in figure 8. In the figure, the expressions of
table 1 are placed on the left side, whereas their
opposites are placed on the right side. The figure
shows that the scores of the expressions of model
Helix are all well above zero. Contrary, model Logica
has a low score both on ‘friendly’ and on ‘inviting’.
This could be the cause of the substantial distance
between the emotional response of Logica and the
preferred emotional response of the CALM.
This paper demonstrates that the emotional response to
a product can be an interesting starting point for a
design project. On the other hand, assuming that the
emotional response is the only important factor of
product experience is –naturally- too simplified.
People are influenced by their emotions, but emotions
are not the only factor determining preferences.
Moreover, this paper focuses only on one of the three
kinds of product emotions (i.e., emotions elicited
because of user goals). The other two (i.e., emotions
elicited because of user standards and attitudes) are
left out of consideration.
As a result of this, the attempt to clarify why the
design project only partly succeeded, involved
speculation. The paper assumes a one-to one
relationship between product expression and emotion.
Consequently, the low performance of model Logica
was argumented with the partly inadequate expression.
An alternative explanation could be that Logica elicits
a less preferred emotion because in some way it
conflicts with a standard or an attitude. Still, based on
the results of the project, it can be concluded that the
possibility of introducing a successful product would
be bigger in the EXCITED segment than in the CALM
segment.
Finally, I would like to argue that projects such as
presented in this paper require involvement of the
designer not merely in the design stages but also in the
research stages. By interviewing the users and using
the emocards, the designer got a grip on the emotional
construals that the users have regarding mobile
telephones. This grip, which was only partly rational,
enabled him to create the collages and designs.
Acquiring this grip would not have been possible
without direct contact between the designers and his
intended users.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Gerda Smets of the Open
University for providing the opportunity for this
project, and KPN Research for funding and supporting
this project. Furthermore, I would like to thank Rianne
Valkenburg, Kees Overbeeke, Paul Hekkert (Delft
University), and Stefan Tax (KPN Research) for their
constructive discussions. Ensuing studies to product
emotions are funded by Mitsubishi Motor R&D,
Europe GmbH, Trebur, Germany.
Notes
1. As the design project recited in this paper is
discussed in more detail in a previous paper, this
paper should be regarded as a summarizing paper.
Details regarding both the research and the design
steps can be retrieved in Desmet, Tax &
Overbeeke (2000).
2. Note that the models do not have numerical
buttons because they are operated with voice
control.
References
Desmet, P.M.A., and Hekkert, P. (2000). The basis
of product emotions. Manuscript submitted
for publication , Delft University of
Technology.
Desmet, P.M.A., Hekkert, P., and Jacobs, J.J.
(1999). When a car makes you smile;
development and applic ation of an instrument
to measure product emotions. In: Stephen, J.
Hoch and Robert J. Meyer (Ed.), Advances of
Consumer Research, vol. XXVII (in press).
Desmet, P.M.A, Tax, S.J.E.T., and Overbeeke, C.J.
(2000). Designing products with added
emotional value; development and application
of a ‘research through design’ approach.
Manuscript submitted for publication , Delft
University of Technology.
Frijda, N.H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hinkle, Ds. (1965). The change of personal constructs.
Ohio: Ohio State University.
Ortony, A., Clore, G.L., and Collins, A. (1988). The
cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Reynolds, T.J. & Gutman, J. (1988). ‘Laddering
theory, Method, Analysis, and Interpreta tion’.
Journal of Advertising Research, 28, 11-31.
Russell, J.A. (1980). ‘A circumplex model of affect’.
 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39,
1161-1178.
Schlosberg, H. (1952). ‘The description of facial
expression in terms of two dimensions’. Journal
of Experimental Psychology, 44, 229-237.