Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities

Geke Dina Simone Ludden, Barry M. Kudrowitz, Hendrik N.J. Schifferstein, Paul Hekkert

  • 10 Citations

Abstract

When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visual-tactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)285-309
Number of pages25
JournalHumor
Volume25
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Metaphor
Wit and Humor
Touch
product
Incongruity
Emotions
Conflict (Psychology)
conflict
Deodorants
Confusion
Smell
Rubber
Hearing
Surprise
joke
product design
humor
metaphor
emotion
intensity

Keywords

  • IR-81647
  • METIS-290199

Cite this

Ludden, G. D. S., Kudrowitz, B. M., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Hekkert, P. (2012). Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities. 25(3), 285-309. DOI: 10.1515/humor-2012-0015

Ludden, Geke Dina Simone; Kudrowitz, Barry M.; Schifferstein, Hendrik N.J.; Hekkert, Paul / Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities.

Vol. 25, No. 3, 2012, p. 285-309.

Research output: Scientific - peer-reviewArticle

@article{ce546a3b417d4293a3d4dadec942fb6f,
title = "Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities",
abstract = "When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visual-tactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved",
keywords = "IR-81647, METIS-290199",
author = "Ludden, {Geke Dina Simone} and Kudrowitz, {Barry M.} and Schifferstein, {Hendrik N.J.} and Paul Hekkert",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1515/humor-2012-0015",
volume = "25",
pages = "285--309",
number = "3",

}

Ludden, GDS, Kudrowitz, BM, Schifferstein, HNJ & Hekkert, P 2012, 'Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities' vol 25, no. 3, pp. 285-309. DOI: 10.1515/humor-2012-0015

Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities. / Ludden, Geke Dina Simone; Kudrowitz, Barry M.; Schifferstein, Hendrik N.J.; Hekkert, Paul.

Vol. 25, No. 3, 2012, p. 285-309.

Research output: Scientific - peer-reviewArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities

AU - Ludden,Geke Dina Simone

AU - Kudrowitz,Barry M.

AU - Schifferstein,Hendrik N.J.

AU - Hekkert,Paul

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visual-tactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved

AB - When information from two or more sensory modalities conflicts, this can evoke a surprise reaction as well as feelings of amusement, interest, confusion or disappointment. In concurrence to joke theory, we argue that people appreciate and enjoy appropriate incongruities that can be related back to the product, whereas they are confused by and have negative opinions towards inappropriate incongruities. This paper reports the design and the evaluation of products in two categories (rubber duckies and deodorants), with (in)appropriate sensory incongruities of three types: visual-tactual, visual-olfactory and visual-auditory. Participants evaluated the level of surprise felt and the intensity of resulting emotions. They also indicated their overall liking for the products. Both appropriate and inappropriate incongruities were evaluated as surprising as well as confusing. As expected, appropriate incongruities evoked more amusement and were generally favored. Whereas products with visual-tactual incongruities showed large differences in ratings on liking and amusement between appropriate and inappropriate incongruities, these differences were smaller for products with visual-auditory and visual-olfactory incongruities. Possibly, the appropriateness of an incongruity is more conspicuous when it is brought about by a conflict between touch and vision than when olfaction or audition are involved

KW - IR-81647

KW - METIS-290199

U2 - 10.1515/humor-2012-0015

DO - 10.1515/humor-2012-0015

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 285

EP - 309

IS - 3

ER -

Ludden GDS, Kudrowitz BM, Schifferstein HNJ, Hekkert P. Surprise and humor in product design. Designing sensory metaphors in multiple modalities. 2012;25(3):285-309. Available from, DOI: 10.1515/humor-2012-0015