Cross-Regional Comparison of
Colour Emotions Part I:
Quantitative Analysis
J. H. Xin,1,* K. M. Cheng,1 G. Taylor,1
T. Sato,2 A. Hansuebsai3
1
Institute of Textiles and Clothing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon,
Hong Kong
2
Kyoto Institute of Technology, Kyoto, Japan
3
Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Received 16 September 2002; revised 10 March 2004; accepted 24 March 2004
Abstract: Colour emotion is a feeling or emotion induced in
our brains when we look at a colour. In this article, the
colour emotional responses obtained by conducting visual
experiments in different regions, namely Hong Kong, Japan
and Thailand, using a set of 218 colour samples are com-
pared using a quantitative approach in an attempt to study
the influence of different cultural and geographical loca-
tions. Twelve pairs of colour emotions described in oppo-
nent words were used. These word pairs are warm– cool,
light– dark, deep–pale, heavy–light, vivid–sombre, gaudy–
plain, striking–subdued, dynamic–passive, distinct–vague,
transparent–turbid, soft– hard, and strong–weak. These
word pairs represent the fundamental emotional response of
human beings toward colour. The influences of lightness
and chroma were found to be much more important than
that of the hue on the colour emotions studied. Good cor-
relations of colour emotions among these three regions in
East Asia were found, with the best ones for colour emotion
pairs being light– dark and heavy–light. © 2004 Wiley Period-
icals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 29, 451– 457, 2004; Published online in Wiley
InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.20062
Key words: colour emotion; colour feeling; cultural effect;
geographical effect
INTRODUCTION
Colour is an essential component in our daily life. During
the colour perception process, an associate feeling or emo-
*Correspondence to: J. H. Xin (e-mail: tcxinjh@inet.polyu.edu.hk)
© 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Volume 29, Number 6, December 2004
tion is normally induced in our brains. The term colour
emotion was used recently by researchers in this field to
represent this feeling or emotion.1–3 Many researchers have
suggested that colour directly affects the parts of human’s
nervous system that are responsible for emotion arousal, and
different colours or colour combinations usually have dif-
ferent meanings for people.4,5 As colour emotion is in the
domain of psychology, it is influenced by many factors such
as sex, age, climate and geographic conditions, as well as
race and cultural influences.6,7 The aim of this study was to
investigate the colour emotions of people from Hong Kong,
Japan, and Thailand using a quantitative method and to
compare the colour emotions among these regions. It was
attempted, through this study, to show the influence of the
regional differences. Twelve opponent word pairs for de-
scription of human colour emotions were used in the visual
assessments. These word pairs were warm– cool (WC),
light– dark (LD), deep–pale (DP), heavy–light (HL), vivid–
sombre (VS), gaudy–plain (GP), striking–subdued (SS),
dynamic–passive (DyPa), distinct–vague (DV), transpar-
ent–turbid (TT), soft– hard (SH), and strong–weak (SW).
They were selected in a previous study attempting to iden-
tify the most frequently induced emotions in people’s
minds.8 In addition, these 12 word pairs represent the low-
level emotional responses of the observers, which should be
less complex in comparison with high-level ones such as
feelings of like and dislike.8
Previous studies were conducted to find the quantitative
and qualitative relationships between colours defined by
colour specification systems and their colour emotions. A
colour image scale was derived by Nakamura et al. using
the Munsell colour system in an attempt to express colour
451
TABLE I. Subjects and viewing condition of visual as-
sessments in different regions.
Subjects
Region Number Age Viewing condition
Hong Kong 70 ⬃20 Under Verivide artificial
daylight D65
Japan 80 18–22 Near a north-facing window
(under natural daylight)
Thailand 60 ⬃20 Under illuminant D65 in the
light cabinet
emotions quantitatively.1 In that colour image scale, colour
regions were defined quantitatively according to Munsell
hue, value, and chroma. However, the colours in those
regions had no quantitative relationships with the emotions
induced by them. Nakamura and Sato et al. then derived
quantitative relationships between the colour emotions and
CIE colorimetric specifications based on the 12 pairs of
colour emotion words described.9 –13 However, in that study,
only Japanese subjects were used, therefore the results ob-
tained may only be applicable in Japan. Conversely, the
study of colour emotion and its variations in different cul-
tures is an interesting area due to the considerable increase
in cross culture interchanges, such as product design tar-
geted to consumers in a certain country, and customized
website design. Hence, the quantification of the colour
emotions with standard colour specification and the study of
the similarities and differences between colour emotions for
these three regions were achieved in this work. With im-
proved understanding of colour emotions, suitable colours
can be selected to produce the desired emotional response.
By means of reference to the quantitative relationships
between colour emotions and colour specifications, design-
ers can easily find the induced colour emotional response of
the targeted customers and communicate with colourists to
produce the requisite colours. The similarities and differ-
ences between colour emotions for different countries and
cultures should also contribute towards the exploration of
colour psychology. The colour emotion study discussed in
this article is limited to Japan, Thailand and Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region. The culture and geograph-
ical differences between different regions in some countries
such as China can be quite substantial. The colour emotions
typical of the Hong Kong region may be different from
those of the other regions in China, especially in the north.
The data from Japan was obtained in Kyoto and the data
from Thailand was obtained in Bangkok.
VISUAL EXPERIMENTS
The number of subjects in the visual experiments and their
ages and the viewing conditions used in the three regions
are listed in Table I. In the visual experiments, there were
218 colour samples, each 1.0 cm ⫻ 1.5 cm in size. They
were about 2° subtended to the eyes of the observer with a
viewing distance of 30 cm. The colour samples were se-
lected from the SCOTDIC PLUS 2000 system, which is a
452
textile version of the Munsell colour order system. The
spectral reflectance of each sample was measured using the
Macbeth Colour Eye 2180 spectrophotometer with the small
aperture. The reflectance data were then converted into CIE
L* a* and b* colorimetric values under D65 illuminant and
2° standard observer functions. The distribution of the sam-
ples in CIELAB colour space is plotted in Fig. 1. It can be
seen from Fig. 1 that the colour samples cover the hue,
chroma, and lightness well. When viewing a colour, a
neutral gray mask was used to cover the surrounding area of
the colour sample so as to ensure that the assessment was
not influenced by the colour of the surrounding area. The
colour samples were illuminated along their normal (i.e.,
directly facing the light) and viewed at approximately 45° to
the normal. Each subject was asked to fill in a questionnaire
during the visual experiment. In the questionnaire, the 12
pairs of words for describing the human emotions were
written in their native languages accordingly. After viewing
a colour sample, the subject was requested to select a more
appropriate word to describe the colour from each word
pair.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Quantifying Colour Emotions
The results of the questionnaires were analyzed. A score of
⫹1 was given to the selection of “warm,” “light,” “deep,”
“heavy,” “vivid,” “gaudy,” “striking,” “dynamic,” “dis-
tinct,” “transparent,” “soft,” or “strong,” whereas a score of
⫺1 was given to the selection of the opposite words (i.e.,
“cool,” “dark,” “pale,” “light,” “sombre,” “plain,” “sub-
dued,” “passive,” “vague,” “turbid,” “hard,” or “weak”).
For example, when the warm– cool colour emotion of co-
lour sample 5R1 was assessed by the subjects, the calcula-
tion of the warm– cool percentage (WC) of 5R1 became the
following [Eq. (1)]:
x(⫹1) ⫹ y(⫺1)
WC ⫽ ⫻ 100%, (1)
x⫹y
where x and y are the number of subjects selecting warm
and cool colour emotions for colour sample 5R1 respec-
FIG. 1. The distribution of the colour samples in the
CIELAB colour space using illuminant D65 and 2° standard
observer functions. The lightness of the samples were
sorted prior to the plotting.
COLOR research and application
TABLE II. The correlation coefficients of colour emo-
tion of different regions.
Correlation coefficient, r
Colour emotions of
different regions JP TH

WC HK 0.860 0.860
JP 0.823
LD HK 0.958 0.909
JP 0.946
DP HK 0.951 0.844
JP 0.813
HL HK 0.973 0.912
JP 0.900
VS HK 0.923 0.917
JP 0.831
GP HK 0.930 0.926
JP 0.831
SS HK 0.926 0.851 FIG. 2. The visual assessment results of heavy–light colour
JP 0.741 emotion of Japanese against Hong Kong Chinese.
Dypa HK 0.955 0.864
JP 0.786
DV HK 0.304 0.586
JP 0.822 the other two regions were regarded as good. The correla-
TT HK 0.935 0.943 tion coefficients of 10 of 12 colour emotion pairs between
JP 0.868
SH HK 0.881 0.925
Japanese and Thai were found to be lower than those of
JP 0.879 Japanese and Hong Kong Chinese and between Hong Kong
SW HK 0.928 0.887 Chinese and Thai. The lowest correlation coefficient be-
JP 0.752
tween Japanese and Thai is equal to 0.741. Of all the
correlation coefficients, the best ones were found to be for
light– dark and heavy–light pairs. The correlation coeffi-
tively and x⫹ y is the total number of subjects, (e.g., 70 for cients of these two pairs between any two regions in this
Hong Kong data). study were greater than 0.90.
If all subjects selected “warm” to describe the colour, WC The above-discussed correlation of the colour emotions
was equal to 100%. If all subjects selected “cool” to de- between two regions can be shown by plotting the visual
scribe the colour, WC was equal to ⫺100%. This method assessment results. A total of 36 graphs can be generated for
was applied to all of the colour emotion calculations in this 12 colour emotion pairs among three regions. In this article,
study. only the graphs showing the best and worst correlations are
given as Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 respectively. Figure 2 illustrates
the visual experiment results of the heavy–light colour
Correlation Coefficient of Colour Emotions for
emotions of the Hong Kong Chinese and Japanese. The
Different Regions
results for this word pair by subjects in these two regions
The correlation coefficient, r, of the colour emotion results were very close to each other and very well correlated as the
obtained from different regions was calculated as a prelim- data points were all lined very close to the 45° line, which
inary analysis of the correlation of colour emotions. Table II represents the equal colour emotion of subjects of the two
shows the correlation coefficients of the colour emotions
between any two of the three regions.
As shown in Table II, the correlation coefficients between
any two regions in this study are larger than 0.74, with one
exception, that being the distinct–vague colour emotion
between the Hong Kong Chinese and Japanese, and between
the Hong Kong Chinese and Thai, which are very low. This
low correlation might be due to the difference in meaning
after translating distinct–vague into Hong Kong Chinese
(Cantonese), which caused a different interpretation of the
word pair in the minds of the Hong Kong Chinese when
compared to the subjects of the other regions. Despite the
distinct–vague colour emotion pair, the correlation coeffi-
cients of the other pairs for the Hong Kong Chinese and
Japanese were found to be greater than 0.86, whereas those
for the Hong Kong Chinese and Thai were found to be
greater than 0.84. Hence, the correlations of these colour FIG. 3. The visual assessment results of distinct–vague
emotion pairs assessed by the subjects from Hong Kong and colour emotion of Japanese against Hong Kong Chinese.

Volume 29, Number 6, December 2004 453

regions. The results of the distinct–vague colour emotions
of the Hong Kong Chinese and Japanese were scattered
around and deviated significantly from the 45° line in Fig. 3,
which represents a very low correlation between the two.
Derivation of Mathematical Models
Mathematical models were derived for quantifying the co-
lour emotions of different regions with the CIE standard
colour specifications, L*, C*, and h, through the optimiza-
tion by C⫹⫹ programming. As h ranges from 0° to 360°
and the hue at 0° is equivalent to that at 360°, indicating the
same in perception but a very large difference in magnitude,
two models were derived for each colour emotion pair if an
influence by hue was found. One model is for 0° ⱕ h ⬍180°
[Eq. (2)] and the other is for 180° ⱕ h ⬍ 360° [Eq. (3)].
When the hue influence of the colour emotion pair was
small, only one mathematical model was derived to repre-
sent the correlation of this colour emotion pair in all hue
angles [Eq. (4)]. The empirical formulae of colour emotion
indices are shown in the following:
For the models applicable to the first half of hue angles,
that is, 0°ⱕ h ⬍ 180°, we obtain the following:
CEI0⬚ⱕh⬍180⬚ ⫽ xl L* ⫹ yl 共C*兲a ⫹ zl h ⫹ cl . (2)
For the models applicable to the second half of hue angles,
that is, 180°ⱕ h⬍360°, we obtain the following:
CEI180⬚ⱕh⬍360⬚ ⫽ x2 L* ⫹ y2 共C*兲b ⫹ z2 共360⬚ ⫺ h兲 ⫹ c2 . (3)
For the models applicable to all hue-angles, we obtain the
following:
CEI ⫽ x3 L* ⫹ y3 共C*兲d ⫹ z3 h ⫹ c3 , (4)
where CEI is the colour emotion index representing the
warm– cool, light– dark, deep–pale, heavy–light, vivid–
sombre, gaudy–plain, striking–subdued, dynamic–passive,
distinct–vague, transparent–turbid, soft– hard, and strong–
weak colour emotions of Hong Kong Chinese, Japanese,
and Thai; L* is the CIE lightness; C* is the CIE chroma; h
is the CIE hue angle; x, y, and z are the coefficients of L*,
C*, and h respectively; c is a constant; a, b, and d are the
indices of C*; and x, y, z, c, a, b, and d are also named as
impact factors of the standard colour specifications. The
model with 0° ⬍ h ⱕ 180° was derived from the visual
assessment results obtained for the hue angles between 0°
and 180° and that with 180°⬍h ⱕ 360° was derived from
the visual assessment results obtained for the hue angles
between 180° and 360°. The impact factors were calculated
with an optimization program to fit the visual results based
on the Simplex technique.
The impact factors are shown in Table III. They are used
in the calculation of the CEI. The colour emotion indices
defined in this study range from ⫺100 to ⫹100. When equal
to ⫹100, the colour emotion indices indicate “warm,”
“light,” “deep,” “heavy,” “vivid,” “gaudy,” “striking,” “dy-
454
namic,” “distinct,” “transparent,” “soft,” and “strong” emo-
tions perceived by the subjects. When equal to ⫺100, the
colour emotion indices indicate “cool,” “dark,” “pale,”
“light,” “somber,” “plain,” “subdued,” “passive,” “vague,”
“turbid,” “hard,” and “weak” emotions perceived by the
subjects. If the calculated index is outside the boundaries of
⫺100 to ⫹100, it is assumed to be equal to ⫺100 or ⫹100
respectively.
The reliability of each derived mathematical model was
analyzed by calculating the correlation coefficients, r, be-
tween the results of colour emotion obtained from the visual
assessment and the derived models. The r values are shown
in Table IV. From Table IV, it can be seen that the corre-
lations of all colour emotions obtained from visual assess-
ment and the derived models were considered to be satis-
factory, because all of the correlation coefficients were
larger than 0.85. Among them, eight colour emotion pairs
(i.e., light– dark, deep–pale, heavy–light, gaudy–plain, strik-
ing–subdued, dynamic–passive, soft– hard, and strong–
weak colour emotions) were found to have very good cor-
relations as the correlation coefficients were larger than 0.90
and the best one reached 0.97.
According to the derived mathematical models, the de-
gree of each colour attribute influencing the colour emotion
can be evaluated by the first derivative of the mathematical
models with respect to that colour attribute. If a slight
change of the colour attribute causes a large difference in
the colour emotion, this colour attribute is considered to
have a significant influence on the colour emotion. A qual-
itative term, dominant parameter, is assigned to the colour
attribute having a substantial influence on the colour emo-
tion. The dominant parameters affecting the colour emo-
tions are summarized in Table V, together with the one
having a slight influence on colour emotion. This term is for
qualitative indication only. Table III shows the exact influ-
ence of each colour attribute.
Lightness as the Dominant Parameter
From Table III and Table V, it may be seen that lightness
of colour had an obvious influence on most of the colour
emotion pairs in this study, except the warm– cool and
gaudy–plain colour emotions. It was the dominant pa-
rameter in the light– dark, deep–pale, heavy–light, trans-
parent–turbid, soft– hard, and strong–weak colour emo-
tions for subjects from Hong Kong, Japan, and Thailand.
In addition to these, vivid–sombre and striking–subdued
colour emotions of Thai subjects were mainly affected by
the lightness, whereas it was the dominant parameter of
the distinct–vague colour emotion of the Hong Kong
Chinese and Japanese.
Of the three regions in this study, lightness was found to
have influence on most of the colour emotions for Thais,
except for the warm– cool, gaudy–plain, and distinct–vague
pairs. Conversely, the warm– cool, vivid–sombre, gaudy–
plain, striking–subdued, and dynamic–passive colour emo-
tions of Hong Kong Chinese and Japanese were found not to
be influenced by lightness of colour. These results suggest
COLOR research and application
TABLE III. Impact factors for evaluating CEI.
CEI of Coefficient of L* Coefficient of C* Coefficient of h Index of C* Constant
different
regions x1 x2 x3 y1 y2 y3 z1 z2 z3 a b d c1 c2 c3

WC HK 0.154 0.355 — 39.4 23.5 — ⫺0.303 ⫺0.159 — 0.372 0.429 — ⫺114 ⫺106 —
JP 0.586 0.542 — 146 0.217 — ⫺0.517 ⫺0.283 — 0.192 1.45 — ⫺249 ⫺74.7 —
TH ⫺0.331 ⫺0.315 — 11.2 0.016 — ⫺0.389 ⫺0.321 — 0.621 2.05 — ⫺44.7 ⫺12.1 —

LD HK — — 2.11 — — 2.02 — — 0.083 — — 1 — — ⫺187

JP — — 2.58 — — 2.16 — — 0.114 — — 1 — — ⫺209
TH — — 2.90 — — 1.91 — — 0.070 — — 1 — — ⫺205

DP HK ⫺3.59 ⫺3.67 — 0.451 ⫺0.216 — 0.040 0.098 — 1 1 — 189 189 —

JP ⫺3.62 ⫺3.95 — 1.27 0.375 — 0.076 0.071 — 1 1 — 167 192 —
TH ⫺2.93 ⫺2.31 — 1.20 0.326 — 0.037 0.049 — 1 1 — 179 159 —

HL HK ⫺3.34 ⫺3.47 — 0.476 ⫺0.264 — 0.037 0.072 — 1 1 — 175 183 —

JP ⫺3.76 ⫺3.73 — 0.121 ⫺0.495 — 0.046 0.020 — 1 1 — 208 204 —
TH ⫺3.26 ⫺2.74 — 0.470 ⫺0.323 — 0.042 ⫺0.016 — 1 1 — 201 186 —

VS HK — — 0.774 — — 17.0 — — 0.097 — — 0.591 — — ⫺172

JP — — 0.242 — — 2.49 — — 0.150 — — 1 — — ⫺119
TH — — 1.57 — — 2.54 — — 0.098 — — 1 — — ⫺175

GP HK ⫺0.332 ⫺0.114 — 4.57 13.2 — ⫺0.081 ⫺0.005 — 0.867 0.664 — ⫺74.0 ⫺103 —
JP 0.419 0.156 — 0.841 1.56 — ⫺0.086 ⫺0.015 — 1.26 1.21 — ⫺118 ⫺103 —
TH 0.052 0.471 — 3.04 3.41 — ⫺0.112 ⫺0.080 — 1 1 — ⫺100 ⫺119 —

SS HK ⫺0.750 ⫺0.748 — 2.85 10.6 — ⫺0.052 0.060 — 0.961 0.684 — ⫺35.6 ⫺54.8 —
JP 0.125 ⫺0.575 — 2.53 3.07 — ⫺0.042 ⫺0.044 — 1 1 — ⫺100 ⫺47.2 —
TH ⫺1.65 ⫺1.72 — 8.08 13.1 — 0.016 0.111 — 0.704 0.528 — 46.1 54.5 —

DyPa HK ⫺0.296 ⫺0.120 — 3.16 4.39 — ⫺0.073 0.032 — 0.931 0.864 — ⫺68.8 ⫺84.8 —
JP ⫺0.350 ⫺0.719 — 1.27 1.11 — ⫺0.100 ⫺0.034 — 1.16 1.23 — ⫺68.5 ⫺44.6 —
TH 0.717 1.33 — 2.54 3.23 — ⫺0.090 0.036 — 1 1 — ⫺114 ⫺157 —

DV HK — — 1.76 — — 1.47 — — 0.101 — — 1 — — ⫺149

JP ⫺1.08 ⫺2.15 — 0.193 1.03 — 0.026 0.156 — 1.55 1.18 — 2.93 55.7 —
TH ⫺0.185 ⫺0.515 — 4.23 2.00 — 0.032 0.177 — 0.838 1.04 — ⫺42.2 ⫺23.3 —

TT HK — — 2.23 — — 1.10 — — 0.100 — — 1 — — ⫺182

JP 2.20 1.79 — 1.11 2.51 — 0.096 0.073 — 1 1 — ⫺192 ⫺161 —
TH — — 2.79 — — 1.36 — — 0.058 — — 1 — — ⫺212

SH HK 2.90 2.95 — ⫺0.510 0.424 — ⫺0.051 ⫺0.020 — 1 1 — ⫺147 ⫺160 —

JP 2.69 3.04 — 0.469 0.898 — ⫺0.128 ⫺0.160 — 1 1 — ⫺142 ⫺176 —
TH 2.72 2.88 — ⫺0.122 1.242 — ⫺0.062 ⫺0.095 — 1 1 — ⫺146 ⫺174 —

SW HK ⫺2.63 ⫺2.76 — 1.19 0.353 — 0.053 0.050 — 1 1 — 116 136 —

JP ⫺2.51 ⫺3.23 — 1.96 1.42 — 0.023 0.061 — 1 1 — 78.7 129 —
TH ⫺2.82 ⫺2.27 — 0.845 ⫺0.011 — 0.105 ⫺0.006 — 1 1 — 164 163 —

that the Thai subjects were more sensitive to the lightness of Chroma as the Dominant Parameter
colour when compared to the Hong Kong Chinese and the
Japanese. Chroma of colour was found to influence most of the
colour emotions of subjects from the three different re-
gions selected in this study, and, though the degree of
TABLE IV. Correlation coefficients (r) of colour emo- influence is small in some cases, it affected nearly all of
tion between the results obtained from visual assess-
the colour emotions of the Japanese and the Thais, except
ment and the derived models.
for the heavy–light pair. In other words, chroma is im-
Colour emotion pair Correlation coefficient, r portant for the colour emotion response in the minds of
the Japanese and the Thai subjects. However, for the
Warm–cool 0.862
Light–dark 0.913 deep–pale, heavy–light, and soft– hard colour emotions,
Deep–pale 0.974 Hong Kong Chinese were affected by the lightness of a
Heavy–light 0.975 colour only, and the influence of chroma on the strong–
Vivid–sombre 0.881
Gaudy–plain 0.943 weak colour emotion of the Hong Kong Chinese was
Striking–subdued 0.939 found to be less than those for the other two regions.
Dynamic–passive 0.938 Therefore, the dependence of colour emotion of the Hong
Distinct–vague 0.851
Transparent–turbid 0.868 Kong Chinese on chroma was found to be slightly less
Soft–hard 0.958 than that of the Japanese and the Thai subjects in this
Strong–weak 0.965 study.

Volume 29, Number 6, December 2004 455

TABLE V. The dominant parameters in each colour was only dependent on chroma for the Thai subjects,
emotion pair of each region. unlike those from the other two regions.
Standard colour specifications
CEI of different
regions L* C* h Hue as the Influential Parameter

WC HK ⻫ O When the hue of a colour was considered, the degree of

JP ⻫ O influence was found to be relatively insignificant for the
TH ⻫ O subjects of the three regions in this study. In other words,
LD HK ⻫ ⻫ irrespective of whether it was red, green, yellow, blue or
JP ⻫ ⻫ purple, for example, the hue did not significantly affect the
TH ⻫ ⻫ subjects’ colour emotional responses. In Table V, it may be
DP HK ⻫ seen that a comparatively large hue influence was found for
JP ⻫ O the warm– cool colour emotion pair, although colours with
TH ⻫ O high chroma were always assessed as “warm” by the sub-
HL HK ⻫ jects. In general, reddish and orange colours were assessed
JP ⻫ as “warm,” whereas bluish colours were assessed as “cool”
TH ⻫ by all the subjects. However, some deviations arose in the
VS HK O ⻫ assessment of the “cool” colours. The Japanese perceived
JP ⻫ whiter and bluer colours as cool (e.g., for a colour with L*,
TH ⻫ ⻫ C*, and h equal to 75, 41, and 184 respectively, the WC for
GP HK ⻫ Japanese subjects was equal to ⫺36, whereas it was equal to
JP ⻫ 8 for Hong Kong subjects). In the case of the Thais, green-
TH ⻫ ish colours were also perceived as being cool (e.g., for a
SS HK O ⻫ colour with L*, C*, and h equal to 75, 40, and 171 respec-
JP ⻫ tively, the WC for Thai subjects was equal to ⫺26, whereas
TH ⻫ ⻫ for Hong Kong and Japanese subjects the WC was equal to
DyPa HK ⻫ 1 and 3 respectively). The Hong Kong Chinese viewed
JP ⻫ some blue colours with high chroma as relatively hot co-
TH O ⻫ lours, unlike the people of the other two regions. This is
DV HK ⻫ ⻫ considered to relate to the different climate conditions and
JP ⻫ ⻫ geographical locations. The bluish colours can be associated
TH ⻫ with the cold weather, especially with snow and water.
TT HK ⻫ ⻫ Conversely, Thailand is a tropical country, and coolness is
JP ⻫ ⻫ easily associated with the green trees and plantations. Hong
TH ⻫ ⻫ Kong has subtropical weather, and the people living there
SH HK ⻫ never experience cold, snowy days. Their results indicated
JP ⻫ O that grayish colours are most likely to be cooler and not so
TH ⻫ O much related to the hue of a colour. Although it is not
SW HK ⻫ O intended to explain the reasons for the differences among
JP ⻫ ⻫ those regions, the colour emotional response of the three
TH ⻫ O regions and their differences can be found through the use
Key: ⻫: the dominant parameter that this standard colour speci- of the mathematical models established in this work.
fication influences the correspondence colour emotion most.
O: a slight influence of this standard colour specification on the
correspondence colour emotion. CONCLUSIONS
blank: no obvious influence of this standard colour specification
on the correspondence colour emotion. In conclusion, the colour emotions of the Hong Kong Chi-
nese and Japanese were found to have more similarities than
those of the Japanese and the Thais as well as the Hong
Kong Chinese and the Thais. Of the three regions in this
Lightness and Chroma as the Dominant Parameters
study, the Thai people were more sensitive to the lightness
Light– dark and transparent–turbid colour emotions of the of a colour, whereas chroma was found to affect the Japa-
Hong Kong Chinese, Japanese, and Thais were found to be nese and Thais more when the 12 pairs of colour emotions
dependent on both lightness and chroma of a colour. The were considered. Hue in general had much less effect on
colours of high lightness and high chroma were regarded as colour emotions compared with lightness and chroma, ex-
“light” and “transparent” by all of them. cept for warm– cool, which was more evidently influenced
In Table IV, the distinct–vague colour emotion of the by hue. The quantitative relationships between the colour
Hong Kong Chinese and the Japanese were also found to emotion induced and the colour in terms of CIE colour
be dependent on both lightness and chroma. However, it specifications were obtained for the three regions and this

456 COLOR research and application

should assist the comparison of the similarities and the
differences, which in turn could assist the understanding of
the colour emotional responses of the different region and
its possible influencing factors. In practice, a better under-
standing of the colour emotion should assist the use of
colours in product design targeting people in different re-
gions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank The Hong Kong Polytechnic University for the
funding of this research project.
1. Nakamura T, Sasaki Y, Sato T, Teraji K. An attempt for instrumental
expression of the colour image scale. Sen-I Gakkaishi 1992;48:96 –
101.
2. Xin JH, Cheng KM, Chong TF, Sato T, Nakamura T, Kagiwara K
Hoshino H. Quantifying colour emotional scale: What has been
achieved. Res J Textiles Apparel 1998;2:46 –54.
3. Sato T, Kahiwara K, Xin J, Hansuebsai A, Nobbs J. Methodology for
deriving visual scale based on colour emotion. In: Proceedings of colour
and visual scales 2000. National Physical Laboratory, London, UK, 2000.
4. Humphrey N. The colour currency of nature. In: Porter T, Mikellides
B. Colour for architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1976.
Volume 29, Number 6, December 2004
5. Kobayashi S. The aim and method of the colour image scale. Color
Res Appl 1981;6:93–107.
6. Hsiao SW. A systematic method for colour planning in product design.
Color Res Appl 1995;20:191–205.
7. Crozier WR. The psychology of colour preferences. Rev Progr Colorat
Relat Top 1996;26:63–72.
8. Nakamura T, Sato T Teraji K. Arrangement of colour image words
into the non-luminous object colour space. J Colour Sci Assoc Jpn
1994;18:10 –18.
9. Nakamura T, Hoshino H, Sato T Kajiwara K. Attempt for quantitative
evaluation of cool–warm colour image. Sen-I Gakkaishi 1996;52:27–
31.
10. Nakamura T, Sasaki Y, Sato T, Teraji K. Numerical evaluation of
colour image words on colorimetry. In: Proc of AIC Color’ 97, Kyoto,
1997, Color Science Association of Japan, Tokyo, Japan. p 699 –702.
11. Sato T, Kajiwara K, Hoshino H, Nakamura T. Quantitative assessment
of “light– dark”, “deep–pale” and “heavy–light” colour images. Sen-I
Gakkaishi 1997;53:7–14.
12. Sato T, Kajiwara K, Hoshino H, Nakamura T. The attempt of quan-
titative assessment for “vivid–sombre”, “gaudy–plain”, “striking–sub-
dued”, “dynamic–passive”, “distinct–vague”, “transparent–turbid”,
“soft– hard” and “strong–weak” colour images. Sen-I Gakkaishi 1997;
53:30 –37.
13. Sato T, Kajiwara K, Hoshino H, Nakamura T. Quantitative evaluation
and categorising of human emotion induced by colour. Adv Colour Sci
Technol 2000;3:1–7.
457