MA Thesis - Affective responses to Tactile experiences

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences: A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

by Larissa Braga 052411 / Word count: 10863 Istituto Marangoni / Manchester Metropolitan University

Dissertation submitted to Istituto Marangoni as part of the work for the Manchester Metropolitan University degree / MA Contemporary Interior Design

LARISSA BRAGA

Declaration I declare that this dissertation, submitted in accordance with the requirements of Istituto Marangoni and Manchester Metropolitan University for the postgraduate degree of MA Contemporary Interior Design, is all my own work and has not been submitted previously to any other institution. All source materials used in the preparation of this dissertation, whether published or unpublished, have been duly acknowledged and referenced. All referencing is in accordance with current Institutional, Faculty and Departmental requirements.

If awarded the above degree, I give full permission for this dissertation to be considered for retention for the benefit of future students and others at the discretion of the Institution. If retained, the full content, including appendices and additional material, may be made available for retrieval, viewing, printing and/or saving by authorised users. Any such use must comply with current UK copyright legislation.

I understand that the University will only make exemplary dissertations available to others and the Institution is not obliged to keep this work for any longer than is deemed academically appropriate. After this period has elapsed, I agree to the destruction of the work without further notice.

I understand that, if required, I should make a copy of the dissertation for my own purposes before submission. The Institution is not under any obligation to return a copy of the work to me after submission.

Signed: Larissa Andreoli Vargas De Almeida Braga Date: 10th January 2020

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

2 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Abstract This research paper has been concerned with unravelling the determinants of ‘tactile perception’ and explores the affective qualities of tactile experiences as a counter-reaction to occularcentrism. The aim was to produce a theoretical framework to base the creation of a measurable tool for the interpretation of the affective qualities of surfaces. The research suggests increased tactility to heighten environmental perception and culminated in the production of the Touch-Feel Toolkit. It contributes towards material-driven design approaches to promote thoughtful material selection and innovative material application.

Keywords: affective design / tactile design / tactility / material experience / emotions / senses / toolkit Istituto Marangoni, Winter 2020. London, UK

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

3 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my thesis supervisor Prof. Claire Pajaczkowska for keeping the door always open to me. She consistently allowed this paper to be my own work, steering me in the right direction whenever she thought was necessary.

I would also like to thank my friends and loved ones that supported me throughout the development of this research. I would like to thank Amanda Peixoto, the Thiru family, my parents, my sister Beatriz for giving me the book that fuelled this research, the members of my Neocraftsmanship group for being so inspiring and myself for striving to achieve more and never giving up. Without their invaluable participation, this research could not have been successfully carried out.

Finally, I must express my very deep gratitude to my parents and to my partner Elliott Ritchie for giving me constant support and constant encouragement throughout my years of study and through the development of this thesis. This would not have been possible without them. Thank you.

Larissa Andreoli Vargas de Almeida Braga “By coming out of your mind, you come to your senses�

-

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

4 WINTER 2020

Alan Watts

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Contents list 1.

Introduction 1.1 Rationale 1.2 Aim 1.3 Objectives

2.

Literature review 2.1 Ocularcentrism 2.2 Importance of tactile design 2.3 Environmental perception and experience 2.4 Emotion theories 2.5 Design education for tactile sensibility 2.6 Design practice for tactile experiences

3.

Methodology 3.1 Approach and strategy 3.2 Case studies 3.3 Toolkit design 3.4 Focus group 3.5 Interviews

4.

Results and discussion 4.1 Purpose 4.1.1 Purpose of the research 4.1.2 Purpose of the toolkit 4.2 Theoretical framework 4.3 The toolkit 4.3.1 Case studies 4.3.2 The toolkit 4.3.3 Focus group 4.4 Applicability and validity of the Touch-Feel Toolkit

5.

Conclusion 5.1 Further research prospects

6.

7.

Reference list Bibliography Appendix

8.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

5 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Introduction As a result of technological advances, the overstimulation of modern life has ordered and divided the senses (Braga, 2019). Vision and hearing are now the privileged sociable senses, whereas the other three are considered as archaic sensory residues (Pallasmaa 1996). Our culture of distraction, granted by visual and hearing overload, weakens the perception of the physical world and diminishes real interactions between the body and the environment (Walker 2019).

Tactile interaction with the world brings awareness to the body as a physical presence sharing the physical world with other physical elements (Bermudez, Marcel and Eilan 1995). Selfawareness comes from the ability to sense the physicality of the body and it is through touch that one senses the limits between the self and the outside world, and their intrinsic interaction (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008).

The simultaneity of the interaction implies touching as being touched and is described as the tactile experience (M. H. Sonneveld 2004). Exploring and understanding the components of such experience can better equip designers to design ‘for experience’ (Braga, 2019). Touch being a channel for emotion is vital for human well-being (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009).

However, touch is a tacit experience challenging to access (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008).

Developing a toolkit to address the affective dimension of tactual perception is a way of accessing such experience. The toolkit is built upon the idea materials and surfaces have affective qualities embedded into their sensorial qualities. Attributing value to such qualities allows for controlled and measurable assessment of the affective dimension of the ‘tactile experience’.

This research is a bi-product of the Neocraftsmanship module at the Istituto Marangoni London which allowed me to begin to explore questions surrounding presence and perception.

Rationale In this paper, I define the field of ‘tactile perception’ as the research area that develops an understanding of people’s subjective experiences that result from “tactually” interacting with their environment. From there, a conceptual framework is developed, to support the theoretical and practical phases of the research.

This paper makes an argument against the bias towards vision and occularcentism as the main tool for design/popular culture. It attempts to propose a toolkit for designers and users to associate tactile stimulation with affective stimulation; a toolkit that relies on user feedback to develop and grow. There is a clear importance to encouraging and integrating tactile interactions into our daily lives; however, there is a large gap between theoretical and practical applications when it comes to designing for tactile experiences – thoughtful textures and materials application. A toolkit will guide designers on a more meaningful material selection and application to possibly potentialize its effects and produce powerful experiences.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

6 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Aim This paper aims to produce and propose a theoretical framework for the creation of the TouchFeel Toolkit. The research suggests increased tactility to heighten environmental perception and culminates in a practical exercise in which the user is the central object of study.

Objectives Objectively, this research paper will attempt to: ● Determine the issues with occularcentrism in contemporary design approaches ● Critically analyse both practical and theoretical perspectives that support the effects of increased tactility in design education and practice ● Assess the practicality of the study and its application in the contemporary design context ● Define the determinants of tactile perception based on environment-behaviour psychology and embodiment theories ● Experiment and produce a tactile toolkit to improve the characterisation of the affective qualities of materials

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

7 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Literature Review This section reviews the work of authors and scholars - extensively researched upon - that evidence the problematics of occularcentrism, reinforce the importance of a tactile perspective in cultural production and incentivise the use tactile stimuli in design education and practice.

The literature includes authors such as Aart van Bezooyen, James J. Gibson, Juhani Pallasmaa, Marieke H. Sonneveld, Elvin Karana, Valentina Rognoli, Paul Virilio and other additional articles to support the arguments made.

Ocularcentrism As previously mentioned, this research revolves around the bias of occularcentrism in cultural production. For Pallasmaa, the dominance of vision over modern culture has been reinforced by the press, media and the multitude of technological advances in the last decades (Tamari 2017). Virilio suggests that the disruption of perception by visualising technologies has forged a new ocularcentrism that has completely transformed the way we view, perceive and participate in the world (Bartram 2004).

In recent years, the hegemony of visual reality has resulted in a crisis of representation that if continuous - can potentially generate harmful consequences for human relations (Bartram 2004). According to Virilio, social reality is constructed through the current science and technology and any transition between one another has a profound consequence in social life; the current crisis of representation is the sign of society replacing one preconceived reality for a more visual and digital one (Armitage 2000). What Virilio explains is that new visual technologies do not eliminate our perception of the world, but they replace it instead (Bartram 2004). The current use of technology as a guiding lens poses a threat to the development of society as it blurs the feeling of being in touch with the physical world, removing the ability for self-awareness (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008).

For instance, the replacement of a daily social transaction by its equivalent digital one devalues and removes the meaning of the given transaction. In digital activities, the lack of tactile confirmation removes the ability of the user to react and interact with the change in the environment such transaction has caused (Manger, et al. 2019). The hegemony of the eye and the digital culture produced around it seems to weaken our capacity for empathy, compassion and participation with the world (Pallasmaa 1996). However, society remains mostly oblivious to the consequences of producing new visual technology for a sight dependent society (Bartram 2004).

Figure 1: The online shopping condition is an example of the transition between a more visual and less tactile reality

Source: Cash Cow Couple

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

8 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 2: Pointing at the tablet condition vs. pointing at a book condition. The exchange from books to tablets in education limits the nature of the interaction between children and the information presented to them.

Source: A. Mangena, T. Hoela, M. Jernesa, T. Moser in Shared, dialogue-based reading with books vs tablets in early childhood education and care, 2019

Importance of tactile design The unchallenged hegemony of the eye must be broken by re-introducing a tactile perspective into cultural reality as an attempt to regain (and retain) meaning through touch. According to phenomenologists Merleau-Ponty, Husserl, Heidegger and Schutz the world is embodied by meaning that reveals itself through our actions instead of being abstract, predetermined notions (Dourish 2001). As Merleau-Ponty explains, meaning is found in the world in which we act, and which acts upon us (Merleau-Ponty 1945).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

9 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Upon action and interaction, the physical body is aware of the physical qualities of the world, and through touch, we explore, feel and manipulate the world (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009) and understands the materiality of the world (Merleau-Ponty 1945). The skin is an organ for thought (Pallasmaa 1996) and not only has the ability to read surface properties (texture, weight, density, temperature) but can also translate it into feelings, sensations and behaviour (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008). Our ability to sense and perceive things “tactually” allows us to also form experiences and meaning of our surroundings (Karana, 2010). The sensorial neglect of designing only for the pleasure of the eyes puts aside all other senses that constantly converse and interact with the environment.

Considering bodily interaction not only in the making process but in the final user experience when designing is key for the success of the design; the maker must continually think of and use form it to its full spatial completeness (Moore 1937). That is, considering and putting to use the reactions provoked on the user and feeding it back into the design. The communication between user and maker is never-ending and should not be disregarded when it comes to tactile considerations.

In other words, it is essential for a designer not only to think of the spatial three dimensionalities of a designed object/space but also on its experiential perception and the perceived meaning to the user.

Perception and experiential theories Before developing a theoretical framework on tactile experiences, it is fundamental to understand how individuals interact, experience and perceive their environment.

In the distraction crisis we find ourselves in, it is essential for designers to begin to explore what determines perception and forms behaviour to improve not only mindfulness and mental health but most simply presence. This chapter gives an overview of perceptual and experiential psychology theories to try to answer, “What composes one’s awareness of their presence in the world?”. The answer to this question has the potential to equip designers with tools to design spaces and objects with resonant user experiences.

An interactionist view of perception and action is The Theory of Affordances by James J. Gibson (Greeno 1993). The theory relies on a mixture of retinal and haptic stimuli and instant cognitive assumption; it focuses on information that is available in the environment that provides perceivers with an immediate, direct and functional assessment of an element as having a meaning and offers interaction, thus dictating behaviour (Gosling, Gifford and McCunn 2013).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

10 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 3: The theory of affordances - in other words - is what an object offers us. For example, the shape, the look the overall characteristics of a switch inform me of its use (to flick up or down) and meaning (lights, turn on/off button, etc.)

Source: R.l Cantada in Affordance and educational games, 2010

An object’s ‘affordance’ is how an object makes us think to use them. All these objects have properties and qualities – such as colour, size, texture, composition etc; however, what we immediately perceive is what the combination of all these properties affords or offers us - only after our attention is shifted to the properties that compose such object (J. J. Gibson 1977).

For instance, infants might see their foot and pull to bite it, only after realising it is their own.

Yet, I hypothesise: are not those same properties that can determine the perceiver’s sensations, feelings and emotions based on the interaction? Are those not the essential and vivid values of the experience itself?

Sensorial perception bases user-experiences; yet tactile interaction has not been sufficiently explored as a variant component for environmental perception and experience. Surfaces and substances afford all sorts of physiological and behavioural responses (J. J. Gibson 1977).

Manipulation and manufacture are human forms of behaviour in which the perceiver’s attention is completely focused on the properties of the object (J. J. Gibson, Observations on active touch 1962). Active touch is an exploratory sense and relies on movement for stimulation: it is through movement, in interaction, that people perceive “tactually” (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

11 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Figure 4: Exploratory methods to explore objects "tactually"

Source: M. Sonneveld and R. Schifferstein in The tactual experience of objects, 2008

Different from tactual perception is tactual sensation. The perception of an object may be considered as invariant throughout moving, while tactual sensations vary while moving (M. H. Sonneveld 2004). A physical property of an object may evoke many different sensations, depending on the way one interacts with it (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2008).

On the other hand, the term ‘material experience’, coined by Prof. Elvin Karana (Karana and Camere 2018), is defined as the experiences one has with, and through, materials. It consists of four experiential components: sensorial (cold, rough, soft), affective (emotion), performative (movements) and interpretive (meaning) (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015). In terms of tactile experience, the affective response of the user to the physical aspect of a product through touch is the most important interaction. Tactile experiences are powerful tools to be explored in design, especially since touch is considered to be the channel for affective communication in tactile perception (M. H. Sonneveld 2004).

Lastly, perception is composed of the meanings and uses the environment offers us; yet, the interaction between the physical body and the physical world dictates and is dictated by the experience. Tactile perception allows for the interpretation and exploration of the environment and it is heavily accompanied by physical and mental sensations. The relation between sensation and emotion the sense of touch affords us is what composes experience and perception – and is, therefore, the basis of this research.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

12 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Emotion theories The emotions observed within ‘tactile experiences’ are considered basic emotions (M. H. Sonneveld, Dreamy Hands: exploring tactile aesthetics in design 2004) (refer to Table below), and to better understand the scope of such emotional response, secondary research into emotion theory and measuring representative models was carried out. A dimensional approach (Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum 1957) is a practical way of representing emotions in a multi-dimensional space using controllable coordinates (Cambria, Livingstone and Hussain 2012).

Figure 5: Existing definition of basic emotions

Source: E. Cambria, A. Livingstone and A. Hussain in The Hourglass of emotions, 2012

An early example is Russell’s circumplex model (Russell 1979), built upon the basis that emotions are generally considered positive/negative and provoke high/low arousal (Russell 2003). These two dimensions (valence and arousal) are guidelines in where to place emotion labels according to a scale (Cambria, Livingstone and Hussain 2012).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

13 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Figure 6: Russell's circumplex model, an early example of dimensional emotion representation

Source: E. Cambria, A. Livingstone and A. Hussain in The Hourglass of emotions, 2012

A variation of Russell’s model is the Geneva Wheel of Emotions, composed by two main dimensions of emotional experience (valence and control) (Cambria, Livingstone and Hussain 2012). Intensity is also represented by 5 circles of decrescent order and a neutral or alternative option is given.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

14 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 7: Geneva Wheel of emotion with two controllable dimensions of control and valence

Source: H. Karimova in The Emotion Wheel, 2019

Another dimensional model is Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions (Plutchik 2001), which consists of 8 basic, 8 advanced and 8 intermediate emotions. The radial dimension represents the degrees of similarity between emotions, while the vertical axis and the colour-coding represent its intensity (Cambria, Livingstone and Hussain 2012).

Figure 8: The Plutchik's wheel of emotion is a chromatic and three-dimensional representation of emotions

Source: M. Donaldson in Plutchik's Wheel of Emotion, 2011

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

15 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

In sum, all three theories and their respective representations clearly exemplify the determinants, intensities and correlations between human emotions. The quantifiable character of the Geneva Wheel provides a measurable mode of understanding and interpreting emotion, which can be applied in user-experience exchanges. The chromatic character of Plutchik’s wheel provides a relatable, transferrable and simple tool to the understanding of the basics emotions which are relevant in design (Putting Some Emotion into Your Design – Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions 2019). Therefore, the Geneva and Plutchik’s Wheels of Emotion are two good starting points when considering a design from an emotional perspective.

Design education for tactile sensibility Since the creation of computer-aided design (CAD) tools in the 80s, the way design is taught, practised and perceived has changed radically. The lack of tactile qualities in modern design reflects the over-digitalisation and loss of manual (and tactile) interaction during design processes (van Bezooyen 2014).

Teaching methodologies that relied on the use of materials as tools for learning and design, such as the Bauhaus, integrated fine arts, textiles and crafts in furniture and architectural education (van Bezooyen 2014). In the 20s, Johannes Itten developed the ‘theory of contrast’, heavily used through the compulsory, half-year preliminary course ‘Vorkurs’ at the Bauhaus.

The theory involved exploring the sensorial qualities of materials to later compare and contrast against other materials (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015). The aim of the lesson was for the ‘contrasts’ to be felt, not seen allowing students to experience and appreciate materials’ qualities through hands-on tactile exploration (Itten 1975). Following Itten, Moholy-Nagy developed a course at the Bauhaus focused specifically on the tactile experiences of materials (Wick 2000). The course utilised of tactile tools such as tables, wheels and ribbons onto which materials were arranged and scaled according to a given sensorial criterion (e.g. soft to hard, smooth to rough) (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015).

Both methodologies are examples of integrating material experiences in formal education by evidencing the importance of the encounter between sensorial characterisation and active material manipulation in material understanding and application (van Bezooyen 2014). This highlights the current gap in design education in teaching for sensitive and meaningful material selection based on maker and user-centred sensorial, affective and interpretive experiences (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009).

A ‘material-driven’ design approach speaks of a hands-on process of exploration and prototyping that considers tacit knowledge gathered through personal/individual experiences (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015). In essence, it is a way of ‘learning by doing’ (van Bezooyen 2014) by using a natural way of learning, exploring and understanding the physicality of the world and applying it into the creative process. The purpose of the exercise is to elicit meaningful experiences in and beyond utilitarian assessment (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) and not to present perfectly finished designs, but more raw and rough objects (van Bezooyen 2014). In this case, the use of materials is a starting point and driver of the creative process, and during constant interaction, the designer discovers new material opportunities (van Bezooyen 2014).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

16 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

In recent years, we have encountered an effort to re-implement material exploration in education in Marieke H. Sonneveld class ‘Tactility’ at the Delft University of Technology (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009). The course followed a conceptual framework called the Tactual Experience Guide, a practical tool composed of five (5) domains and each one was explored individually by the students and recorded in the form of a mind map. The tool allowed students to acquire a language on tactile experiences and to build up their personal ‘tactual database’ (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009). This is quite a simple tool to interpret and approach such a complex concept. The guide not only helps students to steer through their personal experience but also allows them to visualise a method of recording for the tactual experience.

Figure 9: The five domains of the tactual experience

Source: M. Sonneveld and R. Schifferstein in The tactual experience of objects, 2008

Figure 10: The Tactual Experience Guide in use

Source: M. Sonneveld in Tactual Experience Guide, 2008

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

17 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Two main design exercises were carried out during the course: 1) Design of unpleasant and pleasant touch – The exercise asked students to transform either side of a wooden rod into a pleasant and unpleasant experience. The exercise gives very interesting insights into tactile experiences. According to Sonneveld, students discovered the nuances on the aesthetic aspects of touch and that physical sensation is associated with a multitude of emotions and can vary between people (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009). The exercise also highlighted that physical pleasantness and unpleasantness can be mixed phenomena depending on the length of the interaction.

Figure 10: Work produced during the Tactility course at Delft TU run by Marieke Sonneveld

Source: M. Sonneveld and H. Schifferstein in To learn to feel, 2008.

2) Pleasant design – During this exercise students were asked to redesign a product in such a way that the interaction with the device becomes a pleasant tactual experience.

The exercise had three phases: I) an object deemed unpleasant by the student is selected and tactually explored using the Tactual Experience Guide; II) through mood boarding and exploring pleasant objects, the students formulate a desired, pleasant body language for the product, again using the Tactual Experience Guide; III) redesign the selected product through ‘tactual’ sketches and models. The exercise evidenced that to design for tactual experience is to design through tactual experience, becoming particularly explicit in the fact that most students take a material-driven approach to it, opting for hands-on techniques over sketching.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

18 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 11: Examples of works produced during the course Tactility run by Marieke Sonneveld

Source: M. Sonneveld and H. Schifferstein in To learn to feel, 2008.

These educational situations illustrate the possible ways and methods in which educators can integrate material experiences into the curriculum of schools. Material-driven design is the best approach to designing for touch and the experiences reported by the students evidence the importance of tacit knowledge and the building of a private tactile database to their design education (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009). More hands-on approaches to design process should be integrated into the current design education system to better equip students with tools to design for human experiences and meaningful creations (van Bezooyen 2014).

Design practice for tactile experiences The role of materials in the current design scenario is more pragmatic than experiential. Yet, the utilitarian side of a material alone does not dictate its success and its use widespread (E. Manzini 1989) (Manzini and Petrillo 1991) as it is not only what it is, but what it does (E. Manzini 1989), what it expresses to us, what it elicits from us (Karana, Pedgley and Rognoli 2014) and what it makes us do (Giaccardi and Karana 2015) that ensures the success of a material.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

19 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA The choice of materials can communicate an experience to the end-user through the expression of the designer’s experience during the design process and elicit emotions in users.

The works of Piet Hein Eek with scrap wood and Tokujin Yoshioka with paper and glass illustrates on-going work on designing by tinkering with materials and discovering textural and finishing opportunities. The Institute of Making is an initiative from the University College London that provides an experimental and creative material library that encourages designers and students to tinker with materials and explore their sensorial and technical qualities.

Figure 12: Works of Tokujin Yoshioka on the left and Piet Hein Eek on the right

Source: Tornado / Design Miami, 2007 and Artribune

In spite of the ongoing research on the sensorial qualities of materials, the lack of systematic methods to define and design for material experiences poses a barrier on the actual application of such concepts in practice (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015). Aiming at support designers in understanding and working on material experiences, The Material Driven Design Method (MDD) (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) was developed by a group of researchers to aid designers in practice.

Examples of MDD projects are: • • • •

Designing with waste coffee grounds (Zeeuw van der Laan 2013) Designing with natural fibre composites (Taekema 2012) Designing with liquid wood (Manenti 2011) Designing with bio-plastics (E. &. Karana 2014)

The journey through designing with the MDD method begins with a material in-hand and ends with an object, an application and/or a further developed material (Karana, Barati, et al.

2015). It is composed of 4 stages that guide designers through the design process and can be

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

20 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

either followed in sequence or start at a certain stage and jump over to the next most relevant stage.

Figure 13: Material-driven design (MDD) method

Source: (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) in Material-driven design (MDD) method

1) Understanding the material: Technical and Experiential Characterisation At this stage, the designer needs to understand both the material’s technical and experiential qualities. The designer is encouraged to tinker with the material (cut it, bend it, burn it, smash it, combine with other materials), benchmark it (group it with other similar materials) and look into user studies to explore how the material is received and how it is considered by others (experiences of its aesthetics, meanings and emotions). This step is important in understanding the material’s inherent qualities, restrictions and application opportunities to then correlate it to the observed sensorial and experiential qualities of the material (MDD, x).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

21 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Figure 14: Examples of Material Tinkering during the project "I leek you a lot"

Source: V. Rognoli, M. Sonneveld and S. Parisi in Material Tinkering, 2017

Figure 15: Example of material benchmarking of experimental materials

Source: (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) in Material-driven design (MDD) method

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

22 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

2) Creating Materials Experience Vision The designer is asked to explore and group the outcomes from the previous stage and reflect upon its purpose. They are then to produce a vision statement (a design intention) to steer them through the design process, picturing the material’s role in society and the user’s experience. A Materials Experience Vision is produced as a result of the intentions the designers want to put forward, including aspects of interpretation (e.g.: the material will express affection), emotion (e.g.: it will cause joy) and/or performance (e.g.: it will require delicate use).

Figure 16: Material Experience Vision of Coffee Grounds material

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

23 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Source: (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) in Material-driven design (MDD) method

3) Manifesting Material Experience Patterns At this stage, the designer must understand and test how, when and if others experience the material in the same way it was intended (Giaccardi and Karana 2015) (E. Karana 2009).

To understand the user’s experience of the material, another supportive method, the Meaning Driven Materials Selection (MDMS) (Karana and Hekkert 2010), is incorporated.

The method intends to gather information on the perceived meanings the material might have. It gives insight into alternative associations, meanings and values identified by participants from which the designer draws conclusions that can possibly relate to an envisioned meaning of the material.

Figure 17: Meaning of Materials Model

Source: E. Karana, P. Hekkert and P. Kandachar in Meaning of materials, 2008

Figure 18: Order of actions of the MoM tool

Source: E. Karana, P. Hekkert and P. Kandachar in Meaning of materials, 2008

4) Creating Material/Product Concepts Lastly, the designer’s findings are taken into the design phase.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

24 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

A focus group with 50 design students at master’s level at the Politecnico di Milano was conducted to test the outcomes of using the MDD method as a design process. In small groups, students were given one material concept (sample), its technical sheet and the Materials Experience Patterns diagram - based on the MoM tool - for ‘provocative’ and ‘modest’ (part of stage 1 and stage 3 were received completed). Students were to design a product utilising the material given to produce a ‘provocative’ and ‘modest’ design. In total, five successful designs for each material concept were produced.

Figure 19: Examples of two perceived meanings of 'modest' above and 'provocative' below based on the MoM tool

Source: E. Karana, P. Hekkert and P. Kandachar in Meaning of materials, 2008

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

25 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Figure 20: "Marbile" based on waste fabrics by Marina Psimikaki, Yang Yudan, Marta Siminska and Ioanna Oikonomou, 2016

Source: V. Rognoli, M. Sonneveld and S. Parisi in Material Tinkering, 2017

The method utilises of additional tools to help guide the designer through the steps of the design process and support the experience, by also allowing the user to reflect and steer through the experiential characteristics of the material. The method is very much selfsufficient in the sense that it can be applied to any project situation.

In conclusion, the creation of systematic tools to aid designers in practice is the most effective way to introduce designing for material experiences in practice. However, there are aspects of the MDD method that should be further developed to break down each stage, by introducing additional methods and tools to ease the navigation through the process. The fact is that, by presenting materials at the beginning of the design process, designers are more focused on thinking about surfaces, experiential and sensorial qualities of the design when generating ideas, instead of finding a material solution for pre-set forms and functions. In fact, exploring materials allows us to think in new ways and sometimes reconsider premature forms and shapes.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

26 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Methodology Four secondary types of research were carried out to explore and test the practicality of the study: A) Case studies; B) A practical exercise; and C) An exercise conducted through a focus group; and D) Interviews.

The methodology for this research will attempt to fill the gaps detected in the literature and support the theory being built. The methods will be used to explore the different approaches to the research question as well as produce, test and validate a toolkit, which will allow it to expand and refine itself as data is gathered and analysed (Cash, 2018).

Research approach For this research an iterative approach will be taken to allow the research to progressively refine itself as the data is cyclically gathered and analysed (Goodman, Kuniavsky and Moed 2012). An iterative approach is chosen as the needs of the current user/design scenario were not fully known and all requirements could not be defined in advance (Boulanger 2017). Data were gathered as literature was reviewed and practical/creative work was developed, which allowed the research to better itself to compose a strong-founded final product (Goodman, Kuniavsky and Moed 2012). The approach chosen contributes to the final theory being built as it adapts to each iteration (refer to Image below) making the process thorough and responsive to new information (Goodman, Kuniavsky and Moed 2012). It also allowed the freedom to the study to alter its direction after transitioning into deeper levels of research (Braga 2019) and to renew itself as the research question becomes more defined (Goddard & Melville, 2011).

Figure 21: Iterative development is frequently referred to as an “agile� approach, as each cycle is quickly renewed, delving deep into research and each turn is incremental to the final research

Research strategy The research relies on qualitative data to inform the practicality and impact of the topic in the current design scenario through participatory research techniques (Pink 2009). The critical analysis of existing research informs the development of the practical visualising exercise.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

27 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Case Studies In this section, two descriptive case studies of tools for material experience are chosen as an empirical inquiry to identify the design process of cases within real-life context that have comparable features to this research (Yin 1994). It is a helpful method in the preliminary and exploratory stage of this research, as a foundation for the development of my own toolkit (Eisenhardt 1989).

The position of commentator will systematic methods (Rowley 2002) aiming to understand the theoretical and practical framework utilised by Rognoli (2010/12), Camere and Karana (2009) during the development of their research by describing and critically analysing their tools in a way that is applicable to this research (WSU 2016). This should provide me with the knowledge to help build my research framework and tool around tactility and emotion. It can help build a more cohesive, useful and structured tool using elements previously considered in other researches. The main questions intended to be answered are: •

How - do researchers develop a tool and what elements are considered? does it intend to benefit designers? (application; the validity of research)

•

What - are the uses/purpose of their tool? theoretical and practical frameworks are used? (literature and methodology)

Touch-feel toolkit (Visualising – practice) A practical method was chosen to find a systematic method for the interpretation of emotional responses during tactile experiences, a tool currently missing in ‘material experience’ research and methods. Followed by the analysis of two case studies of similar nature, applying the findings into the design of a toolkit as a means of learning through doing (Rowley 2002). It allowed me to have an informed perspective on issues relating to the application of the research in both education and practice.

The aim of this exercise is to attempt to translate and communicate complex concepts of this research into a simplified visual tool; it is a method for interpreting, analysing, presenting and communicating the experiential and emotional qualities of materials (Gray and Malins 2004). To avoid over-subjectivity, the toolkit is securely placed within a formal theoretical framework and methodological transparency (Gray and Malins 2004). In principle, the toolkit is accessible, transparent and transferable to all areas of design and the work (Gray and Malins 2004). Additionally, the use of the toolkit encourages discussion between people and mainstreams the topic within design culture (Gray and Malins 2004). The toolkit is both an outcome as well as a method of investigation as it was developed ahead of the completion of the theoretical research.

The visual features utilised in the tool draws aspects from the Ma2E4E toolkit, Russell, Geneva and Plutchick’s wheel of emotion. To protect the originality and the authorship of each respective visual representation, new drawings and designs are created for the TouchFeel Toolkit.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

28 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Focus group Using a focus group as a method for evaluation and analysis allows me to assess the reception of the toolkit in design practice and education (Morgan 1998).

The purpose of the focus group is to test the usability and validity of the toolkit amongst design students and not to gather data on the results of the toolkit. A questionnaire intended to gather feedback from the participants on their experience of using the toolkit (Freitas, et al. 1998).

The participants were students at Master’s level enrolled in the Neocraftsmanship module at the Istituto Marangoni London. The focus group was supervised by Prof. Claire Pajaczoskwa who divided participants into 4 groups of 3 and a pair. Students were divided according to their design project groups for the given module, only to better manage the focus group during the exercise as the data was to be completed exclusively individually. The focus of the practice was to observe the interaction/use of the toolkit by people inside the groups (Freitas, et al. 1998).

The structure of the focus group started with a small presentation introducing participants to the topic and the toolkit; followed by an exercise utilising the Touch-Feel Toolkit to interpret several material samples; and, at last, a questionnaire for feedback was handed out.

Each table included 5 material samples, two copies of the sensorial scale and the graph, and a copy of the Touch-Feel wheel. The materials varied between material samples from material vendors and common daily objects (i.e.: velvet, sponge, slime, tinsel, glass, aluminium, etc.).

Hand sanitiser was provided to eliminate discomfort between students after interacting with the materials. Students were open to sharing their opinions and adding to the discussion at any point of the focus group.

At the end of the dynamic, a short questionnaire was handed out in order to gather feedback and better understand the overall experience and success of the tool. All participants were given consent forms and no video or audio recording was taken (MMU, 2019).

Interviews The purpose of carrying out interviews is to explore the views, results and/or motivations of designer educators and practitioners currently working in with tactile/material experiences in design (Gill, et al. 2008). The interviews are specifically tailored to professionals knowledgeable in this research topic to provide a ‘deeper’ understanding of the current position the study has within the design scenario. In the case of this research, the interviews aim to gather detailed insights into the topic in education and to better understand the little known around the topic in practice.

The participants were selected according to their area of expertise and understanding of the research topic. Two participants contribute to the topic in research and education areas and the other in the area of tactile design in graphic design. All three interviewees are relevant actors in the scope of the research topic, and each contributes to different areas of this research.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

29 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA The design of the interview aims to yield as much information about the study phenomenon as possible and addresses the aims and objectives of the research (Gill, et al. 2008). In the case of skype interviews, the conversation is semi-structured to allow for more flexibility and involve having a set of guiding questions that will keep the interview on track (Wilson 2012).

In emails, because of the nature of the interview, a very structured “conversation� is recorded, with previously structured questions answered in text form. That allows for little to no flexibility in the responses and can lack in spontaneity (Gill, et al. 2008).

In either case, the set of questions are sent to the interviewee prior to the interview allowing him/her to familiarise themselves with the structure of the interview, so that the process appears more natural and less rehearsed (Wilson 2012).

At the end of the interview, the interviewee is open to contribute to the research in any way they find relevant. This can often lead to the discovery of new, unanticipated information (Wilson 2012). All interviews are recorded and transcribed to protect against bias and provide a permanent record of what was and was not said (MMU, 2019).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

30 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Results and Discussion In this chapter, the insertion of ‘tactile perception’ and affective qualities in materials experience in the current design culture/education/practice is reflected upon, in response to the literature review, case studies, the practical exercise, focus group and interviews.

Additionally, based on case studies, the chapter proposes the ‘Touch-Feel Toolkit’ – result of the practical exercise - as an attempt to support and add to existing methods and tools for tactile/material experience. Also, the constant addition of information into the research, given by the nature of the iterative approach, resulted in a significant recalibration of the final research project. The analysis of the results and knowledge gathered during the development of this paper recognises the importance of the chosen methods in complementing and building the theoretical framework surrounding the toolkit; not to mention the insight into the toolkit’s applicability, validity, usability and possible applications in both design education and practice.

Purpose Purpose of research This research was developed as an attempt to unravel hidden aspects of ‘tactile perception’ contributing to user experiences and assist the understanding of the experiential (Camere 2019) and affective qualities of materials to design students and professionals. This research contributes to material-driven design approaches that promote thoughtful material selection and innovative material applications. Herein, a discussion over the purpose of the research and the production of the toolkit is supported by the results of the qualitative methods previously researched.

The hegemony of eye in current design culture is causing us to live increasingly in what Pallasmaa calls an ‘everlasting present’ (Pallasmaa 1996). Crushed by the speed of information and simultaneous multi-tasking, society currently faces a severe crisis of representation that has further distanced people from their sense of reality by digital and mass media (Nöth 2003).

However, our ability to instinctively perceive our surroundings tactually opens up a whole other realm to be explored in design culture. By analysing and observing the building blocks of ‘tactile perception’, we are able to explore ways in which we can re-stimulate users and recentre their attention to the present time. During the interview with Prof. Marieke Sonneveld, she points out our society’s neglect of touch on a fundamental level as the main factor to the lack of tactile sensitivity of design professionals and their production (refer to Appendix H).

In a study conducted to explore the effects of scale, function, culture and gender on the meaning of metal and plastic objects (Karana and Hekkert 2010) materials were recorded as being the main factor in the formation of meaning. The experiential qualities of materials play a large part in attributing meaning and behaviour and therefore, by exploring their ‘tactile perception’ qualities, designers can evoke and shape user interactions through their understanding of the experiential and affective qualities of any materials in-hand.

Yet, it is a challenge to combine research on tactility and education (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009). In fact, during an interview with Prof. Valentina Rognoli, she evidences ISTITUTO MARANGONI

31 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA the gap in the current design education that by not stimulating tinkering with materials students are not educated to understand that the qualities of materials go beyond their technical properties (refer to Appendix H). Materials produce experiences in user interactions that are as equally important as their technical properties (Camere 2019). By comprehending both qualities of materials, we achieve a holistic understanding that can influence the design process (Karana, Hekkert & Kandachar, 2008) and should, therefore, be part of the taught in the current education system.

Purpose of toolkit Why did I decide to produce a toolkit?

There is an importance to integrating and encouraging tactile experience; however, there is not only a gap in design education, but tactile sensitivity also fails to be developed in design practice. Material-driven methods are the main approaches to exploring the tactile qualities of surfaces in practice. However, their implementation in practice can be somewhat difficult and additional tools must be included to further ease the exploration through the methods.

The decision to develop a toolkit as part of this research project was based on the strong connection touch has with affective behaviour and the lack of a systematic approach to discovering/exploring the affective qualities of materials. A toolkit is a method of facilitating the communication between our sensorial experience and our affective response in order to bridge over the gap language has on the expressiveness of emotion.

With basis on Prof. Sonneveld’s experience in dealing with developing tactile sensibility in design students, language fails us when trying to communicate about our tactual experiences (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009) (refer to Appendix H). Therefore, developing a design tool is a means of assisting designers in handling issues by stimulating reflection-in-action (Buchanan, 1992).

Moreover, it supports the design scenario by offering an agile and time-saving method for practitioners short of time and skills to carry out user studies (Camere 2019). Through this exercise, new emotional data in user experiences can be uncovered and its use can actively involve, inform and inspire others (Gray and Malins 2004) to develop innovative approaches to design and material selection processes through tactile awareness (Camere 2019).

In conversation with Prof. Rognoli, she validates the possibility to characterise the affective qualities of materials given the sensorial and expressive qualities of materials are the basis of emotion. “From perception, you can get emotion. The quality of the sensorial perception gives you the quality of the emotion.� (refer to Appendix H) A survey carried out during the focus group also evidenced student openness to exploring and learning about tactual experiences (refer to Appendix E). Therefore, developing a toolkit allows for designers to visualise and understand the emotional qualities of tactile experiences and to easily apply the knowledge in any design field. The toolkit also gives visibility to the topic as a viable way of transferring emotion-design research into practice (Gray and Malins 2004). As a whole, educating designers into understanding the components of material/tactile

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

32 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

experiences can aid in lingual communication and open up the design space for intrinsic material-user experiences and innovation (Camere 2019).

Theoretical framework The production of a theoretical framework supporting the toolkit is based on Sarah Pink’s Sensory Ethnography as a reflexive and experiential process of investigating design opportunities by attending to the senses (Pink, x).

Herein presented, the theoretical exploration of ‘tactile perception’, experience, knowing, knowledge, practice and culture (e.g. Ingold 2000; Thrift 2004; Howes 2005a) acknowledges that sensoriality is fundamental to how we learn about, understand and represent others’ experiences (Pink, x). The main aspect of the research is the continuous feedback loop between the maker and the user.

During the theorisation process, four criteria for design theory creation and evaluation were followed: 1) applicability in various fields and design production; 2) use language as a way of explaining, describing and predicting design aspects; 3) adopt the language of existing theories; 4) accommodate for generative activity (Hodges, et al. 2017).

By defining the components of perception, we are able to understand what the environment affords to us. Our senses produce an instant cognitive assumption of our surroundings, as a direct and functional assessment of the meaning and use of elements offering interaction.

Touch, being an exploratory sense, receives intense stimulation through movement and contact which plays a large part in our formation of meaning and understanding of use.

Tactile perception can be broken down into two components: the tactile interaction and the tactile experience.

Tactile experience, according to the Tactual Experience Guide, is composed of movement, the tactual properties of the material, and the gut feelings, sensations and affective behaviour produced during the interaction. It is considered to be the affective response of the user to the physical aspects of an element (M. H. Sonneveld 2004).

Tactile interaction, according to the Meanings of materials, 7 out of 13 sensorial properties contributing to the attribution of meaning are exclusive to the sense of touch (E. Karana 2009). Tactual interaction allows us to sense surfaces (e.g.: through pressure we perceive softness and hardness; through friction we perceive roughness). It is considered to be the sensorial response of the user to the physical aspects of an element.

Tactual perception is, therefore, the response to physical sensations that movement and interaction triggers; which are, in turn, unconsciously attributed to gut feelings; thus, generating affective behaviour.

Both the Tactual Experience Guide (Sonneveld and Schifferstein 2009) and the Material Experiential Guide (E. Karana 2009)draw aspects from both interaction and experience.

However, in Prof. Karana’s guide, the interpretative aspect of the experience poses a threat to ISTITUTO MARANGONI

33 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA the usability of the tool bringing a large amount of subjectivity based on user characteristics (e.g.: gender, cultural background, race, etc.). In such subjectivity is space for the language barrier to sneak in and restrict the exploration of the perceived meaning and/or experience.

Similarly, Prof. Sonneveld’s guide includes under affective behaviour a range of aspects that bring along the subjectivity of the user (e.g: familiarity, power match, etc.). To eliminate the language restriction and account only for the instinctive/natural affective response, more basic and simplistic terms to describe the affective behaviour must be used. From there, a tread can be drawn back into the interpretive and affective aspects of the interaction to arrive at a conclusion.

Figure 22: The canvas of the experiential qualities of materials and their interrelationships

Source: E. Karana in Meaning of materials

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

34 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 23: The five domains of the tactual experience

Source: M. Sonneveld and R. Schifferstein in The tactual experience of objects, 2008

On the basis that the tactile experience of an element, object or surface is a matter of the sensitivity of the designers themselves (Sonneveld, 2010), tactual interaction accounts for more intrinsic characteristics that do not consider the user’s own traits and memories, which is what Sonneveld describes as the gut feelings. Attempting to remove as much subjectivity from the topic as possible, a more simplified version of the tactual perception (Touch-Feel of Surfaces) is proposed.

Herein, as an attempt to produce an intermediate step to further understand the perceived meaning and experiences elicited by products and surfaces, a new term is proposed. The affective quality of a material, surface or texture refers to the emotion generated around the interaction. Based on the knowledge that emotions that are commonly considered positive or negative (Camere & Karana, 2017), the same approach can be taken towards sensorial stimulation; although the true valence (pleasantness) of the emotion can be biased towards the user (Russell, 2003), there are basic emotions that are common, instinctive and natural to us.

Russel’s model, the Geneva and Plutchik’s Wheel of emotions are examples of dimensional approaches (Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum 1957) with controllable coordinates to the definition of basic emotions. Each model uses a different number of basic emotions, from 8 to 20 emotions, each a variation of the other. In general, the model's attempts to quantify emotions to produce measurable and controllable results, not accounting for the dualistic nature of some emotions or the part-time progression may play in the endurance of the emotion. However, by combining the fact sensation can be measurable and controllable, simply translating the results and applying them into a model for emotion, can begin to unravel deeper components of the affective behaviour and/or the nature of the gut feelings guiding the affective response.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

35 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA The theoretical framework of the Touch-Feel of Surfaces is consistent with the recurring nature of work of the Expressive Sensorial Atlas (Rognoli 2014) as the research will continue to adapt itself as new data into is gathered. It also follows the openness to human feedback in which the M2E2A4E Toolkit is built upon, joining the user-oriented design community (Lupton 2016) by shedding light into the topics of affective tactility and sensorial perception. In fact, this research aims to lay the same cultural foundations of both Karana’s and Rognoli’s research (Rognoli 2014).

Toolkit design Case studies Expressive-sensorial Atlas The Expressive-sensorial Atlas is a tool developed by Prof. Valentina Rognoli from the Design Faculty at The Polytechnic University of Milan. The aim of the tool is to assist students and professionals in interpreting materials not only from a technical profile but also a sensorial, perceptive and phenomenological perspective (Rognoli, 2010/2).

Rognoli’s atlas was extensively used during the academic course ‘Materials for Design’ at The Polytechnic University of Milan, which has validated the research.

The research’s theoretical framework attempts to fill in the literary gap in Material Studies for design education compared to the abundance in engineering disciplines. The author’s expertise in the field of Material Engineering allowed for the supporting theory to be based on sensorial and aesthetics parameters, which are then associated with the material’s physical and technical properties. Those elements compose the Expressive-Sensorial Characterisation of Materials theory which bridges over material selection techniques between the fields of design and engineering.

The author’s preferred format of illustrated tables uses visually stimulating images, material samples and detailed descriptions of their sensorial qualities to easily guide the user through the Atlas. Perhaps, by providing such large amount of information, it risks giving a too definitive and general material description, leaving no space for the user to explore the interaction unbiasedly and create a profile based on their own material experience. On the other hand, the sensible choice of leaving all tables on a greyscale minimises visual distractions and shifts the focus to the tactile experience.

The tool is organized in three tables to be used in this respective order: the table of the Parameters, Properties and the Theoretical Tables. The three steps simplify the research rationale, as it might be simpler to approach material from a perceptual aesthetics perspective to then associate it to its technical properties.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

36 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

1. The

Table of Parameters makes a phenomenological aesthetics and sensorial description of the materials by defining their tactile (touch and texture) and photometric (brightness and transparency) qualities.

2. The Table of Properties links the material’s physical and phenomenological qualities. It is split and organised following the same structure as the Table of Parameters to ease their correlation.

3. The Theoretic Tables are various pre-produced examples given to illustrate the various physical properties that can be attributed to a certain phenomenological parameter.

It includes a simple and precise definition of the parameter, their link to the properties and the available property measuring instruments (e.g.: g/cm3) 4. By the end, a “sensorial map” can be produced to compare between the considered material samples by placing them along a scale according to their quantitative attributes. A “sensorial profile” can also be produced to catalogue the material samples based on the relationships and differences plotted on the tables. The profile should include a description of the sensorial qualities of the material and its physical properties: composition, technical profile, workmanship technology and any addition technologies available to it.

Figure 24: Expressive sensorial atlas components

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

37 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA In conclusion, the Atlas allows users to build a library of Sensorial Profiles of various materials using the same language throughout, allowing information to be revisited at any time.

Cleverly, that attempts to fill a language gap existent in the characterisation of a material’s sensorial experience. The information gathered by the Atlas enables designers to thoughtfully select materials according to the demand of the project. However, it puts to question whether the qualities perceived and recorded might be restricted to the scale of the sample or if it can be retained in any potential design application. Also, the research leaves an open investigation of the effects of materials’ sensorial qualities on user emotion and sustainability.

Rognoli’s research leaves an opportunity for emotion theories to be implemented to this Atlas and complete the circle between material selection and perceived emotion/experience.

ME2E4 Toolkit The Ma2E4 (Materials-to-Experiences at four levels) Toolkit is a tool developed by Prof. Elvin Karana and Prof. Serena Camere from the Design Faculty at the Technical University of Delft with the aim of producing an agile and easy-to-use tool to ease design students’ and professionals’ understanding of the experiential qualities of materials.

The toolkit was tested in two distinct workshop scenarios: students and professionals. Both carried out at the TU Delft, received feedback that helped the authors revise and further improve the toolkit.

The underlining theoretical framework of the Experiential Characterisation of Materials explores how materials are perceived and what it evokes in users (thoughts, emotions, behaviour). The theory supports that material experiences happen in four experimental levels: i) sensorial (physical experience), ii) interpretive (emotional interpretation), iii) affective (emotional experience) and iv) performative (physical interaction). The purpose of the tool is to help designers understand the user’s experience with the material, to what degree they are common to others’ experiences, and are the determinants of that certain experience.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

38 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 25: Initial version of Karana's toolkit

Source: E. Karana and S. Camere in Experiential characterization of materials, 2018

Karana and Camere’s research consist of a tool for each experiential level and its collection is referred to as a toolkit. In initial draft versions, the tools were separated into individual envelopes inside a box; however, followed by workshop participant’s feedback they struggled to relate between the experiential levels. For that reason, a more holistic approach to the format of the toolkit evolved into a folded A3 (colour-coded folding instructions are given).

The improved format allows for each experiential level to be explored separately to then be all visualised at the same time – by doing that, the author encourages the user to focus on each level before beginning to interconnect the answers to draw a more holistic interpretation of the experience. In fact, the last step of the toolkit is the final reflection, where three questions are asked for the user’s reflection of the experience. Also, in the draft version a few of the elements in the toolkit were stickers or printed in transparent paper, which was not viable for users to reproduce compared to an A3 paper format.

Figure 26: Ma2E4 Toolkit format

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

39 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Source: E. Karana and S. Camere in Experiential characterization of materials, 2018

The authors utilise of scales, sketches, graphs, visually stimulating images and lists of descriptive words to guide the user through each tool. Perhaps, by switching the format of the tool along with unfolding the paper, there is a chance of complicating the recording process and confusing the user, especially once information needs to be compared and seen as a whole – a more continuous visual language for recording information would further simplify the toolkit. On the other hand, using simple sketches to accompany the sensorial scale is a quite clever and comforting aspect of the tool as it helps simplify the sensorial experience.

The list of words provided attempts to bridge over the gap in the language for experiential characterisation; however, the words are not paired up in decrescent intensity like perhaps the sensorial scale does (e.g.: acceptance and trust).

For the purpose of this research, only the sensorial, affective and interpretive levels will be revised up-close.

1. The sensorial level is illustrated by a series of small sketches describing the nature of the sensation and are each paired with a directly opposite sensation (e.g.: Hard and soft). A scale from 2 to -2 is used as a rating system for the user to describe the intensity of the sensation.

2. The affective level is based on Russel’s (2003) model of emotions keeping the axis as valence and replacing arousal for intensity.

3. The interpretive level relies on a list of words to translate the feelings recorded on the affective level into a perceived meaning. Each respective word is accompanied by a set Figure 27: Sensorial and affective levels of the Ma2E4 toolkit

Source: E. Karana and S. Camere in Experiential characterization of materials, 2018

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

40 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

of three images to vaguely describe and illustrate the interpretation of the word.

Those are to be cut and pasted onto the tool. The tool also allows the user to select their own set of pictures to interpret the word selected.

In conclusion, the toolkit allows users to depart from a tactile interaction and arrive at the perceived meaning of that material experience. However, in a practical scenario, you would have to undergo a series of steps to achieve the meaning of a few material samples. That might be easy and agile when working with a hand full of materials, but in practice it might overcomplicate the decision process. Perhaps, a more succinct summary of the steps can compose the picture of all the experiential levels that compose such meaning. The images selected for the interpretive level are very subjective to one’s understanding of the word and should perhaps not even be included to avoid influencing the user’s own interpretation.

Instead, another exercise can be proposed for the user him/herself to select the images and undergo a personal reflection on the meaning of the word selected. On the other hand, the tool is extremely successful and simple to use. Karana and Camere have really carefully Figure 28: Interpretative level of the Ma2E4 Toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

41 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA considered all aspects building a tactile experience, while still including sensations that are visual.

Figure 29: Sensorial, affective and interpretative levels of the Ma2E4 Toolkit

Source: E. Karana and S. Camere in Experiential characterization of materials, 2018

The study of the two existing toolkits has instructed the theoretical framework to support the production of the toolkit as well as all the considerations studied during their production and test. Aspects such as their flexibility, freedom and ease of use, quick and easy to learn, without being prescriptive of design outcomes (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) were noted during the analysis and were considered during the development of the Touch-Feel Toolkit (Stolterman & Pierce, 2012; Daalhuizen, 2014).

The toolkit The Touch-feel aims to be an easy-to-use method that supports design students’ and professionals’ in understanding the sensorial, experiential and emotional qualities of materials. The preference of visual representations over long textual descriptions in both product and materials experience studies is recurring amongst designers (Karana and Hekkert 2010).

The theoretical framework for the design of the toolkit is based on the case studies and emotion theories analysed. At a glance, the theory is based on the idea that sensorial perception can be categorised from positive to negative valence and high to low control (based on the Geneva wheel) which can then be placed into an ‘emotion’ label (based on Plutchwik’s wheel).

The toolkit takes the format of A4 cards meant for each individual material and is advised to be kept with the sample to get a quick snapshot of its sensorial and experiential qualities.

Alongside it, an A3 wheel is used for comparison between materials, to be used when

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

42 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

approaching a project with different materials to understand their relationship. It is easily accessible and reproduced, requiring no particular paper or format to be used.

The visual features utilised in the tool are draws aspects of the Ma2E4E toolkit, Russell, Geneva and Plutchick’s wheel of emotion. The tools utilise of a simple image-aided scale, a monochrome graph/chart, and a colour coded spectrum.

The toolkit is composed of three parts to be used in this respective order: 1. The sensorial scale follows the structure of one of the tools of the Ma2E4 Toolkit using sketches to accompany the sensorial scale. It includes 14 exclusively tactile characteristics to be graded on a scale ranging from 4 to -4 and an option of whether the sensorial quality of the material was highly or lowly controllable by the performative quality of the interaction (pressure, movement, body part in contact). A mean result can be achieved to understand the overall quality of the experience.

Figure 30: Sensorial scale of the Touch-Feel Toolkit

2. The graph follows Russell (2003) and the Geneva Wheel of Emotions which explains emotions as characterized by the three main dimensions of control, arousal (i.e. intensity) and valence (pleasant or unpleasant). The four-axis diagram is used to rate whether the emotion is actually experienced as pleasant or unpleasant, the control over the experience and the intensity to which it is perceived. The intensity of the interaction is quantified by the sensorial scale (4 to -4), which allows the data to be easily transferred and interpreted.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

43 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Figure 31: Recording method of the sensorial qualities of materials of the Touch-Feel Toolkit

3. Lastly, the wheel utilises the structure of the previous graph as base onto which Plutchick’s wheel of emotion is placed. The emotions are divided in 8 categories and placed directly opposite to its complementary emotion (i.e. disgust and joy) and varies in intensity within its own category (i.e. sadness to boredom). The mean value of a collection of materials can be plotted into this wheel and can provide an understanding of which emotional category the experience fits into. By adding colour into this stage of the tool helps convey emotional and sensory ideas (Lupton 2016). From there, designers can use colour to approach the dimensions of emotion in the same way as one would approach the chromatic wheel, as a “colour palette”.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

44 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit Figure 32: Affective qualities of materials exploration

In conclusion, the toolkit provides an individual overview of the tactile experiential quality of the material and allows for an affective interpretation to be made based on the responses recorded. The emotional wheel is highly subjective to the user’s own individual understanding of the emotional response to the interaction. It is easy and intuitive to use and only requires a quick explanation of each step for designers and students to begin to use.

Applicability and validity of the Touch-Feel Toolkit Although the MDD Method namely has an experience-oriented perspective, in fact, what it does is it assists in designing with the material in hand rather than designing experiences for the ISTITUTO MARANGONI

45 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA material in-hand (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015). The lack of space in the MDD design process for the characterisation of the affective qualities of materials neglects a whole component of the ‘material experience’. Catering for the affective component (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) is an opportunity for “craft-oriented” thinking, as mentioned by designer Joao Paulo, (refer to Appendix H).

Figure 33: Material-driven design (MDD) method

Source: (Karana, Barati, et al. 2015) in Material-driven design (MDD) method

During stage 2 of the MDD Method, the lack of a tool to aid in the creation of an Experience Vision slows down the pace of the overall process. By utilising methods to guide the exploration on the first (technical and experiential characterisation) and the third (user data ISTITUTO MARANGONI

46 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

analysis for pattern discovery) stages of the MDD Method, the lack of a tool/method to help the exploration at stage two. Especially given the limited time and skills design professionals have to invest in user studies (Camere 2019), having a tool tackling the affective aspect of material experiences can speed up and ease the process.

Designers are introduced to the theoretical framework - on the affective qualities of materials and the determinants of ‘tactile perception’ – through the practical and sensorial exercise of the toolkit. As graphic design João Paulo pointed out, the tactile design is something palpable and human and, therefore, comes close to people’s emotion (refer to Appendix I). That will allow users to carry over their findings from here to an interpretive and/or a further affective stage of their experiential characterisation process.

Tactile design in the current design scenario has gained visibility in recent year. This toolkit can cater to designers currently working with tactile design such as graphic, product and interior designers. In conversation with the graphic designer João Paulo Lopes who has been using analogous craft or sculpture process to produce digital design, we gained a little insight into the possible use of the toolkit in practice. When approaching a project - in Lopes’ case – exploring materials through their perceived affective qualities can help speed up the material selection process and act as a “divisor of waters” when materials have similar technical properties (refer to Appendix I).

The toolkit can also be used as a library of tactile experiences, where you can collect an affective tactile perception snippet of the material library and store alongside samples easily revisiting them when necessary. They could, therefore, be small “forms” may be available at material libraries and schools for student’s and designer’s consultation.

Focus group During the focus group carried out to test the applicability of the toolkit, some constructive feedback was gathered. Overall, the reception and understanding of the topic of research was extremely positive and motivated a debate amongst the students, as 91% of students recognised the importance of tactile design and 83% its close link to emotion.

The general interest fuelled the exercise and all of the participants considered the research as being useful and practical. Overall, 81% of students considered the toolkit as being a useful way of understanding emotional responses to touch.

As predicted, 41% of participants recognised some difficulty when describing the sensation of touching the materials, while 66% said to have found it difficult to define the emotion when interacting with the materials. Surprisingly, 83 % of participants pointed out certain difficulty at some point of the exercise. Mostly struggled with the control aspect of the sensorial scale, but there were also issues pointed out with the emotional wheel.

Various areas of application of the findings of the toolkit were suggested, such as product, textile, fashion and surface design as well as marketing and user behavioural studies. Overall, 75% of participants said to be likely to use the toolkit again in future projects, likely due to the simplicity of the tool (81%).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

47 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

The results of each individual toolkit help illustrate the usability of the toolkit, but the data generated is not of interest to this paper (refer to Appendix H).

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

48 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Conclusion This research paper has been concerned with unravelling the determinants of ‘tactile perception’ and explored the affective qualities of tactile experiences as a counter-reaction to occularcentrism. The aim was to produce a theoretical framework to base the creation of a measurable tool for the interpretation of the affective qualities of surfaces. The research suggests increased affective tactility to heighten environmental perception and culminated in the production of the Touch-Feel Toolkit. The research contributes towards material-driven design approaches that promotes thoughtful material selection and innovative material applications. The success of the toolkit should therefore be scrutinised based on how it eases one’s process of understanding the affective qualities of the material experience.

The are many improvements to the toolkit based on the feedback from the focus group.

Results are subjective to the sensorial qualities of the interaction and open to interpretation; however, that is where emotion lies - within the traces of our fingertips and our mind. That is not to say that emotions are not affected by other characteristics such as scale, colour and form, but to begin to understand the affective qualities of materials can empower the design of interiors, products, graphics etc. Despite the negative consequences of categorising and generalising user-experiences, similarities and differences can be drawn from the results to produce a snapshot of the perceived affective response a certain material can have. Moreover, a certain level of social analysis is needed to truly understand the character of the emotion (Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum 1957); therefore, the findings gathered through the use of the toolkit should be not taken out of context and should be further analysed and explored.

Despite efforts to minimise the failure to effectively communicate emotions and sensations, it must be noted that a deep gap between linguistics and affective behaviour will continue to exist. Therefore, emotional categorising can fail to describe the complex range of emotional responses. Many factors such as cultural background, gender, age and belief are in the conception of meaning (E. Karana 2009), which exposes the results of the research to certain subjectivity. It should also be noted that different variables such as shape, thickness, product in which the material is applied to etc. can also carry a preconceived meaning.

Finally, this research is centred around the interchange between perceptual and cognitive learning (van Bezooyen 2014). The more physical experiences one is exposed to, the more they are able to describe the sensations they provoke, which unchains a series of nuances of tactile sensibility further expanding their ‘tactual perception’ (Chollet, Valentin, & Abdi, 2004).

Further research prospects The work here illustrated is the summary of three months of theoretical and practical research. The importance of the topic in current design scenario would drive me to pursuit it further into a PhD level.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

49 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

References Armitage, John. 2000. Paul Virilio: From Modernism to Hypermodernism and. London: Sage.

Bartram, Rob. 2004. “Visuality, Dromology and Time Compression: Paul Virilio’s new ocularcentrism .” Time & Society 285-300.

Bermudez, J. L, A Marcel, and N Eilan. 1995. The body and the self. London: MIT Press.

Boulanger, Jean-Louis. 2017. “Management of a Software Application’s Versions.” In Certifiable Software Applications 2, 67-86. London: ISTE Press - Elsevier.

Braga, Larissa. 2019. “Presence by Design.” Istituto Marangoni , London.

Cambria, Erik, Andrew Livingstone, and Amir Hussain. 2012. “The Hourglass of Emotions.”

Cognitive Behavioural Systems 144-157.

Camere, S., Karana, E. 2019. “Ma2E4 Toolkit .” Materials Experience Lab. 10 June. http://materialsexperiencelab.com/ma2e4-toolkit-experiential-characterization-ofmaterials.

Dourish, Paul. 2001. Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. California: MIT Press.

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 1989. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” The Academy of Management Review 532-550.

Freitas, Henrique, Mírian Oliveira, Milton Jenkins, and Oveta Popjoy. 1998. “THE FOCUS GROUP, A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHOD: Reviewing The theory, and Providing Guidelines to Its Planning .” Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore 22.

Giaccardi, E., and Elvin Karana. 2015. “Foundations of Materials Experience: An approach for HCI.” 33rd SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: NY: ACM. 24472456.

Gibson, J. James. 1977. “The Theory of Affordances.” In Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward and Ecological Psychology, by R Shaw and J Bransford, 67-82. New Jersey: Lawrebce Erlbaum Associates.

Gibson, James J. 1962. “Observations on active touch.” Psychological Review 69: 477-491.

Gibson, James J. 1963. “The useful dimensions of sensitivity.” Americal Psychologist 18: 1-15.

Gill, P, K. Stewart, E. Treasure, and B. Chadwick. 2008. Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Chicago: British Dental Journal, Volume 204, No. 6.

Goodman, Elizabeth, Mike Kuniavsky, and Andrea Moed. 2012. “Balancing Needs through Iterative Development.” In Observing the User Experience, 21-44. Waltham: Elsevier.

Gosling, Samuel D, Robert Gifford, and Lindsay McCunn. 2013. “Environmental Perception.” The body, behaviour and space 278-290.

Gray, Carole, and Julian Malins. 2004. Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design. London: Ashgate Publishing.

Greeno, James G. 1993. “Gibson's Affordances.” Psychological Review 336-342.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

50 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Hodges, Peter, Stan Ruecker, Celso Scaletsky, Jaime Riveira, Roberto Faller, and Amanda Geppert.

2017. “Four Criteria for Design Theories.” The Journal of Design, Economics and Innovation 65-74.

Itten, Johannes. 1975. Design and Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus and Later. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Karana, E., & Nijkamp, N. 2014. “Fiberness, reflectiveness and roughness in the characterization of natural and high quality materials.” Journal of Cleaner Production 252-260.

Karana, Elvin. 2009. “Meanings of materials.” Doctoral Dissertation. Delft: Delft University of Technology.

Karana, Elvin, and Paul Hekkert. 2010. “User-material-product interrelationships in attributing meanings.” Internation Journal od Design 43-52.

Karana, Elvin, and Serena Camere. 2018. “Experiential characterisation of materials: Towards a toolkit.” Design Research Society 2018. Limerick.

Karana, Elvin, Bahareh Barati, Valentina Rognoli, and Anouk Zeeuw van der Laan. 2015. “Material driven design (MDD): A method to design for material experiences.” International Journal of Design, 35-54. http://materialsexperiencelab.com/material-driven-design-method-mdd.

Karana, Elvin, Owain Pedgley, and Valentina Rognoli. 2014. Materials experience: Fundamentals of materials and design. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Lupton, Ella, interview by AIGA. 2016. Talking With Ellen Lupton About Tactile Design (16 October).

Manenti, S. 2011. “Designing with Liquid wood: A problem of material identity (Master’s thesis).”

Milan: School of Design Politecnico di Milano.

Manger, Anne, T Hoel, M Jernes, and T Moser. 2019. “Shared, dialogue-based reading with books vs tablets in early childhood education and care: Protocol for a mixed-methods intervention study.” International Journal of Educational Research 88-98.

Manzini, Enzio, and Antonio Petrillo. 1991. Neolite: Metamorphosis of plastics. Milan: Domus Academy.

Manzini, Enzo. 1989. The Material of Invention. Milan: MIT Press.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1945. Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge.

Moore, Henry, interview by Listener. 1937. The Sculptor Speaks Tate Reserach Publication, (18 August): 338–340. Accessed November 19, 2019. https://www.tate.org.uk/art/researchpublications/henry-moore/henry-moore-the-sculptor-speaks-r1176118.

Morgan, David L. 1998. The focus group guidebook. California: Sage.

N/A. 2019. Putting Some Emotion into Your Design – Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions. 12 December. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/putting-some-emotion-into-yourdesign-plutchik-s-wheel-of-emotions.

Nöth, Winfried. 2003. “Crisis of representation?” Semiotica 9-15.

Osgood, Charles Egerton, George J. Suci, and Percy H. Tannenbaum. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

51 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Pallasmaa, Juhani, interview by Mario Alberto Rodriquez Zamora. 2017. Juhani Pallasmaa: “The Ocular-centric View Of The World Has Been Historically Strengthened Especially By The Invention Of Writing And Printing” (19 July).

—. 2005. The eyes of the skin. London: Wiley-Academy.

—. 1996. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. London: TJ International Ltd. Papanek, Victor. 1984. Design for human scale: Human Ecology and Social Change. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. Pink, Sarah. 2009. Soing sensory ethnography . London: Sage.

Plutchik, Robert. 2001. “The Nature of Emotions: Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice.” American Scientist 344-350.

Rognoli, Valentina. 2014. “A Broad Survey on Expressive-sensorial Characterization of Materials for education.” METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 287-300.

Rowley, Jennifer. 2002. “Using Case Studies in Research.” Management Research News 16-27.

Russell, James. 1979. “Affective space is bipolar.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 345-356.

Russell, James. 2003. “Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion.” Psychological Review 145-172.

Sonneveld, M.H, and H. N. J Schifferstein. 2008. “The tactual experience of objects.” In Product experience, by H. N. J Schifferstein and P Hekkert, 41-67. Elsevier Ltd. Sonneveld, Marieke H, and Hendrik N J Schifferstein. 2009. “To learn to feel: developing tactual aesthetic sensitivity in design education.” International Conference on Engineering and product design education. Brighton: University of Brighton.

Sonneveld, Marieke H. 2004. “Dreamy Hands: exploring tactile aesthetics in design.” International conference; 3rd, Design and emotion; 2002; Loughborough. London: Francis. 228-232.

Sonneveld, Marieke H., and Hendrik N. J. Schifferstein. 2009. “To Learn to Feel: Developing Tactual Aesthetic Sensitivity in Design Education.” International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. Brighton.

Taekema, J., & Karana, E. 2012. “Creating awareness on natural fibre composites in design.”

International Design Conference - Design 2012. Dubrovnik: Design Method. 1141-1150.

Tamari, Tomoko. 2017. “The Phenomenology of Architecture: A short Introduction of Juhani Pallasmaa.” Body & Society 23 (1): 91-95. van Bezooyen, Aart. 2014. “Materials Driven Design.” In Material experience, by Elvin Karana, Valentina Rognoli and Owain Pedgley, 278-286. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Virilio, Paul, interview by Carlos Oliveira. 1996. Global Algorithm 1.7: The Silence of the Lambs: Paul Virilio in Conversation (12 June).

—. 1994. The Vision Machine. Indiana: Indiana University Press/British Film Institute.

Walker, Rob. 2019. The art of noticing. London: Penguin Random House Ltd. Walter, Aarron. 2011. Designing for Emotion. New York: A Book Apart.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

52 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Wick, Rainer. 2000. Teaching at the Bauhaus. Hatje Cantz.

Wilson, Virginia. 2012. “Research Methods: Interviews.” Liaison Librarian, Murray Library University od Saskatchewan.

Wolf, Bernhard. 2005. Brunswik’s original lens model . Landau: University of Landau.

WSU, Western Sydney University. 2016. “Case study purpose.” Library Study Smart. July. http://www.westernsydney.edu.au/studysmart.

Yin, Robert K. 1994. Case study research: design and methods. California: Sage.

Zeeuw van der Laan, A. 2013. “Characterisation of waste coffee grounds as a design material: A case study of material driven design (Unpublished master’s thesis).” Delft University.

Bibliography Armitage, John. 2000. Paul Virilio: From Modernism to Hypermodernism and. London: Sage.

Bartram, Rob. 2004. “Visuality, Dromology and Time Compression: Paul Virilio’s new ocularcentrism .” Time & Society 285-300.

Bermudez, J. L, A Marcel, and N Eilan. 1995. The body and the self. London: MIT Press.

Boulanger, Jean-Louis. 2017. “Management of a Software Application’s Versions.” In Certifiable Software Applications 2, 67-86. London: ISTE Press - Elsevier.

Braga, Larissa. 2019. “Presence by Design.” Istituto Marangoni , London.

Cambria, Erik, Andrew Livingstone, and Amir Hussain. 2012. “The Hourglass of Emotions.”

Cognitive Behavioural Systems 144-157.

Camere, S., Karana, E. 2019. “Ma2E4 Toolkit .” Materials Experience Lab. 10 June. http://materialsexperiencelab.com/ma2e4-toolkit-experiential-characterization-ofmaterials.

Dourish, Paul. 2001. Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. California: MIT Press.

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 1989. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” The Academy of Management Review 532-550.

Freitas, Henrique, Mírian Oliveira, Milton Jenkins, and Oveta Popjoy. 1998. “THE FOCUS GROUP, A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHOD: Reviewing The theory, and Providing Guidelines to Its Planning .” Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore 22.

Giaccardi, E., and Elvin Karana. 2015. “Foundations of Materials Experience: An approach for HCI.” 33rd SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: NY: ACM. 24472456.

Gibson, J. James. 1977. “The Theory of Affordances.” In Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward and Ecological Psychology, by R Shaw and J Bransford, 67-82. New Jersey: Lawrebce Erlbaum Associates.

Gibson, James J. 1962. “Observations on active touch.” Psychological Review 69: 477-491.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

53 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Gibson, James J. 1963. “The useful dimensions of sensitivity.” Americal Psychologist 18: 1-15.

Gill, P, K. Stewart, E. Treasure, and B. Chadwick. 2008. Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Chicago: British Dental Journal, Volume 204, No. 6.

Goodman, Elizabeth, Mike Kuniavsky, and Andrea Moed. 2012. “Balancing Needs through Iterative Development.” In Observing the User Experience, 21-44. Waltham: Elsevier.

Gosling, Samuel D, Robert Gifford, and Lindsay McCunn. 2013. “Environmental Perception.” The body, behaviour and space 278-290.

Gray, Carole, and Julian Malins. 2004. Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design. London: Ashgate Publishing.

Greeno, James G. 1993. “Gibson's Affordances.” Psychological Review 336-342.

Hodges, Peter, Stan Ruecker, Celso Scaletsky, Jaime Riveira, Roberto Faller, and Amanda Geppert.

2017. “Four Criteria for Design Theories.” The Journal of Design, Economics and Innovation 65-74.

Itten, Johannes. 1975. Design and Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus and Later. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Karana, E., & Nijkamp, N. 2014. “Fiberness, reflectiveness and roughness in the characterization of natural and high quality materials.” Journal of Cleaner Production 252-260.

Karana, Elvin. 2009. “Meanings of materials.” Doctoral Dissertation. Delft: Delft University of Technology.

Karana, Elvin, and Paul Hekkert. 2010. “User-material-product interrelationships in attributing meanings.” Internation Journal od Design 43-52.

Karana, Elvin, and Serena Camere. 2018. “Experiential characterisation of materials: Towards a toolkit.” Design Research Society 2018. Limerick.

Karana, Elvin, Bahareh Barati, Valentina Rognoli, and Anouk Zeeuw van der Laan. 2015. “Material driven design (MDD): A method to design for material experiences.” International Journal of Design, 35-54. http://materialsexperiencelab.com/material-driven-design-method-mdd.

Karana, Elvin, Owain Pedgley, and Valentina Rognoli. 2014. Materials experience: Fundamentals of materials and design. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Lupton, Ella, interview by AIGA. 2016. Talking With Ellen Lupton About Tactile Design (16 October).

Manenti, S. 2011. “Designing with Liquid wood: A problem of material identity (Master’s thesis).”

Milan: School of Design Politecnico di Milano.

Manger, Anne, T Hoel, M Jernes, and T Moser. 2019. “Shared, dialogue-based reading with books vs tablets in early childhood education and care: Protocol for a mixed-methods intervention study.” International Journal of Educational Research 88-98.

Manzini, Enzio, and Antonio Petrillo. 1991. Neolite: Metamorphosis of plastics. Milan: Domus Academy.

Manzini, Enzo. 1989. The Material of Invention. Milan: MIT Press.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1945. Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

54 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Moore, Henry, interview by Listener. 1937. The Sculptor Speaks Tate Reserach Publication, (18 August): 338–340. Accessed November 19, 2019. https://www.tate.org.uk/art/researchpublications/henry-moore/henry-moore-the-sculptor-speaks-r1176118.

Morgan, David L. 1998. The focus group guidebook. California: Sage.

N/A. 2019. Putting Some Emotion into Your Design – Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions. 12 December. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/putting-some-emotion-into-yourdesign-plutchik-s-wheel-of-emotions.

Nöth, Winfried. 2003. “Crisis of representation?” Semiotica 9-15.

Osgood, Charles Egerton, George J. Suci, and Percy H. Tannenbaum. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Pallasmaa, Juhani, interview by Mario Alberto Rodriquez Zamora. 2017. Juhani Pallasmaa: “The Ocular-centric View Of The World Has Been Historically Strengthened Especially By The Invention Of Writing And Printing” (19 July).

—. 2005. The eyes of the skin. London: Wiley-Academy.

—. 1996. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. London: TJ International Ltd. Papanek, Victor. 1984. Design for human scale: Human Ecology and Social Change. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. Pink, Sarah. 2009. Soing sensory ethnography . London: Sage.

Plutchik, Robert. 2001. “The Nature of Emotions: Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice.” American Scientist 344-350.

Rognoli, Valentina. 2014. “A Broad Survey on Expressive-sensorial Characterization of Materials for education.” METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 287-300.

Rowley, Jennifer. 2002. “Using Case Studies in Research.” Management Research News 16-27.

Russell, James. 1979. “Affective space is bipolar.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 345-356.

Russell, James. 2003. “Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion.” Psychological Review 145-172.

Sonneveld, M.H, and H. N. J Schifferstein. 2008. “The tactual experience of objects.” In Product experience, by H. N. J Schifferstein and P Hekkert, 41-67. Elsevier Ltd. Sonneveld, Marieke H, and Hendrik N J Schifferstein. 2009. “To learn to feel: developing tactual aesthetic sensitivity in design education.” International Conference on Engineering and product design education. Brighton: University of Brighton.

Sonneveld, Marieke H. 2004. “Dreamy Hands: exploring tactile aesthetics in design.” International conference; 3rd, Design and emotion; 2002; Loughborough. London: Francis. 228-232.

Sonneveld, Marieke H., and Hendrik N. J. Schifferstein. 2009. “To Learn to Feel: Developing Tactual Aesthetic Sensitivity in Design Education.” International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. Brighton.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

55 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Taekema, J., & Karana, E. 2012. “Creating awareness on natural fibre composites in design.”

International Design Conference - Design 2012. Dubrovnik: Design Method. 1141-1150.

Tamari, Tomoko. 2017. “The Phenomenology of Architecture: A short Introduction of Juhani Pallasmaa.” Body & Society 23 (1): 91-95. van Bezooyen, Aart. 2014. “Materials Driven Design.” In Material experience, by Elvin Karana, Valentina Rognoli and Owain Pedgley, 278-286. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Virilio, Paul, interview by Carlos Oliveira. 1996. Global Algorithm 1.7: The Silence of the Lambs: Paul Virilio in Conversation (12 June).

—. 1994. The Vision Machine. Indiana: Indiana University Press/British Film Institute.

Walker, Rob. 2019. The art of noticing. London: Penguin Random House Ltd. Walter, Aarron. 2011. Designing for Emotion. New York: A Book Apart.

Wick, Rainer. 2000. Teaching at the Bauhaus. Hatje Cantz.

Wilson, Virginia. 2012. “Research Methods: Interviews.” Liaison Librarian, Murray Library University od Saskatchewan.

Wolf, Bernhard. 2005. Brunswik’s original lens model . Landau: University of Landau.

WSU, Western Sydney University. 2016. “Case study purpose.” Library Study Smart. July. http://www.westernsydney.edu.au/studysmart.

Yin, Robert K. 1994. Case study research: design and methods. California: Sage.

Zeeuw van der Laan, A. 2013. “Characterisation of waste coffee grounds as a design material: A case study of material driven design (Unpublished master’s thesis).” Delft University.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

56 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Appendixes Appendix A Case study - M2E2A4 Toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

57 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Appendix B Touch-Feel Toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

58 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

59 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

60 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Appendix C Focus group presentation

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

61 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

62 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

63 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

64 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

65 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

66 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

67 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

68 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

69 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Appendix D Focus group completed hand outs

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

70 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

71 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

72 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

73 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

74 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

75 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

76 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

77 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

78 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

79 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

80 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

81 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

82 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

83 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

84 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

85 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

86 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

87 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

88 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Appendix E Focus group analysis Question 1

Do you think tactile design is important?

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Yes

No

Unsure

Question 2

Do you think touch is closely linked to emotion?

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Yes

No

Unsure

Question 3

Do you think this is a practical/useful research?

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Yes

No

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

Unsure

89 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA

Question 4

Do you think this is a useful tool to understand your emotional response to touch?

10 8 6 4 2 0

Yes

No

Unsure

Question 5

Did you find it difficult to describe the sensation of touching the materials?

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Yes

No

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

Unsure

90 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Question 6

Would you find it difficult to define the emotion touching the materials gave you?

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Yes

No

Unsure

Question 7

How would you use the information discovered here in a design scenario?

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

91 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA Question 8

What part of the experience did you struggle with?

1

2 1 1

6

1

Scale

High& Low

Textures

Emotion

Graph

None

Question 9

Do you think this is a relatively simple tool?

10 8 6 4 2 0

Yes

No

Question 10

Would you use this again when designing?

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Yes

No

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

Unsure

92 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

Appendix F Interviews transcripts

Interview 1 – Prof. Marieke H. Sonneveld How do you apply your research into design education?

The aim of this interview is to better understand the theoretical and practical approach to Sonneveld’ research.

1) During your course ‘Tactility’ at de Delft Technical University you utilised of the Tactual Experience Guide to aid students in their material exploration. In what way did it guide their exploration?

So, what it does is it unravels the experience because what I found in my research is that people don’t what how to talk about and they don’t know how to think about touch and tactual experiences. So, what I did is I mapped – I unravelled it and for every element I made a map and that supports student to give words to what they experience, and by giving words to what they experience, they can experience better so it’s an [exchange]. So, the words help the experience [and people don’t really understand [their experience] and don’t have the appropriate language to describe it]. That was the basis of my whole research. That fact.

2) What theories on tactual experiences did you use to base the course ‘Tactility’?

I was very much inspired by Leiderman and Kloski and the work of the theory based on Gibson. It is very phenomenological. But from there, there is not much - so there is a lot of theory on touch and tactual experience but not in design and in product touch. So, the tactual experience guide is based on a framework that I constructed myself and I wouldn’t call it a theory, but I did construct my own conceptual framework [the Tactual Experience Guide].

3) What part did emotion play during the course when trying to understand tactile experiences?

Well, it is an essential part of the Tactual Experience Guide. The main comments that I got was that it was a real eye-opener for them, because they have never thought about it in this way and at the same time, they recognise it. So, it was very satisfying to see that it was an eye-opener about something they knew all along. So, it is not something knew to them, they know it very well but now they have awareness of it.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

93 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA 4) What were the main difficulties students and practitioners have when designing for tactual experiences? Where does the research need to go based on student reception and feedback?

So what happens is the framework created awareness and helped them to become aware but still when it comes to detailing and being able to describe in detail what it is, it’s still a struggle and many of them use metaphors, analogies, bring materials to show as if.. you know? So, it very much goes beyond words. Being able to be very precise about what they are experiencing. And the second difficulty was the course had an awareness module and a design module and in designing the biggest struggle was to really create the sensation that they wanted to create. So, to materialise the sensation was difficult because it is so - I don’t know how to say in English - but the sensation that you are actually looking for is very sensitive to have the real one. So, if it is slightly different – in touch it is completely different. You know? So that was really a problem, like how to come up with the material sensation like you would like to have it.

What I mean is if you have a kind of idea of what you would like to design, and you can sketch it, right? The visual part you can sketch it, but the touch part, it is very difficult to simulate with materials, a sensation that is not yet there. So, to imagine and to prototype a material sensation without having the real material – It’s very difficult.

5) In your opinion, where is the gap in the design education system that doesn’t accommodate for material/tactile experiences?

I’m not sure if there is a gap. I don’t think that there is a gap, I think there is more on the fundamental level that our society doesn’t have awareness of touch. So, I think that design education is doing a perfect job in designing what we think design is about, but we neglect so design education very often neglects the tactual experience. But that’s because society neglects the tactual experience. So, I think it’s not a matter of design education, it’s a matter of creating societal awareness of touch.

Not only private, it is neglected.

6) Clearly, some material properties are irrelevant to the object’s use and meaning; however, those same properties can determine the perceiver’s sensations, feelings and emotions based on the interaction. Do you believe emotion evoked during tactile interaction can be a powerful design tool? How can designers design for such emotional responses?

Well, I think you know my answer.

I don’t think there is one method. I think it’s becoming aware of how touch influences or involves emotional responses and from there, there is no one straight forward method on how to approach it and then I mean every designer will have his or her own ways of exploring touch, of playing with touch, of experimenting with touch and of course these emotional responses – you said it yourself – they are so personal also - so I don’t think there is one method we could advocate or could even

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

94 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

create to understand how to design emotions from touch. There isn’t awareness of how it works and yeah, play with it.

7) How far do you believe a user experience can be understood and generalised based on their emotional response to the interaction? In what other ways can designers integrate tactile experiences into their design process as to produce emotional engaging designs?

Yes, it’s impossible to create something that everybody has the same emotional response. But I do believe that nobody is truly unique. So, if you design something for yourself, that you have a kind of emotional response – I do think that you will find other people that resonate the same way with the thing that you have designed.

But that’s no different from any other effective response to what you are designing.

So of course, I do think that designers should include tactility into their designs but not so much… It’s interesting, it’s fun, its sensuous you know, it’s a very important source of inspiration and it’s an important source of - yeah - of enjoying designing so of course I do agree they should do it.

Interview 2 – Prof. Valentina Rognoli How do you apply your research into design education?

The aim of this interview is to better understand the theoretical and methodological approach to Rognoli’s research, to better understand the applicability of the tool and its design process.

The theoretical framework to the Expressive-sensorial characterisation of materials is quite simple and clever. By connecting sensorial and physical qualities of products, you are able to turn a subjective sensorial experience into an almost quantifiable one.

1. What are the underlying theories that based your theory on? And in what way do they differ from your theory?

The theoretical framework to the expressive sensorial atlas – I’m happy that you said that it is simple and clear – the idea was to connect the sensorial qualities to their physical and mechanical properties. I want to highlight this part because I am used to call - what is the phenomenological aspect of material - as a sensorially expressive qualities and the master engineering part of the material I used to use this term that [are its technical] properties. When the subjective and objective and quantifiable qualities – as you said – properties, this was the important thing to me.

The theories that base my research at the time were two. One came from Bauhaus theory because you have to remember that this is a tool for the material location so I use a lot the theories developed in the Bauhaus time that above all the Moholy-Nagy approach to material and the idea that a designer that wants to focus on material needs to know the qualities because if you know the qualities and how to design with the qualities of material, you are able to do a good design. And I use this approach that

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

95 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA was based on the contrast. So created different contrast between the two terms just to recognise two poles and between these two poles, there is all the degradations of the beautiful things between these two poles that are in contrast. For that reason, the atlas is based on this opposites term, cold and warm for example and everything like this, I took this from the Bauhaus.

Another theory that on the basis of my theoretical ground of my research is the phenomenological approach framed by us in the domain of philosophy. The theory that stated that all the phenomena are based on appearance and everything is manifested in our world through the appearance. So, the appearance was what I used to frame my atlas and I thought that it was very important to highlight the part in the material education.

All these theories differ from my own theory because what I did is to put in communication different disciplines as philosophy, pedagogy and material science so is a – the difference is that I use an interdisciplinary approach as the base of my atlas.

2. For my research, I have used your Atlas and Prof. Karana ME2E4 Toolkit as case studies, conducted a small focus group as a first test of my toolkit and now I am conducting some interviews. What methods of investigation were explored during your research?

During my research, the only measure that I used for investigating the results of my own research path was to test the atlas in the classroom so with students and there is in the thanks to their feedbacks I shaped the atlas as a tool 3. What were the main problematics pointed out by your research that drove your tool design? And what issues are your Atlas targeting?

The problematics that they pointed out and they are very useful to improve my atlas was the strong point to use as material sample so what it was very important in my research is to connect the theoretical - let’s say -issues to material sample because for a design education, it is important to have material sample of material that is possible to touch, to experience and really feel the qualities of the material. Thanks to the qualities you can as a design student and then as a design professional you can understand the properties that are behind these qualities or the properties that affect the qualities and as a designer, you have to design the qualities but you need to be aware and to be educated also to understand that the properties behind these qualities.

The qualities are more the phenomenological aspect of the materials and the properties are more the engineering part – the quantitative part of the research.

4. What were the main elements considered during the design of your sensorial atlas?

The principal elements that I considered during the design of my atlas is the fact that, as I already said, that the design student needs to be in contact with materials. At the time, so at the beginning of 2000, a lot of material libraries were developed. But the material libraries so a big collection of the samples were not enough in my opinion for the education from an educational point of view and I designed the atlas as a tool to – ISTITUTO MARANGONI

96 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

a tool aimed to give an access to the material library so for designers to get in contact with a material is very important in a material library, you can have a lot of material samples to interact with but is not enough, you need a frame that can drive you in through the samples to give you kind of perspective, a kind of frame on your brain that can be able to interpret the samples that maybe can be useful for your next project.

So this is the main elements that I considered during the design of my Atlas to give to the student a useful tool to interpret the material worth.

5. How did/would you implement the tool in a classroom environment?

As implementation, as a material education tool I think that it could be more interesting to have a lot of samples maybe samples designed to be part of the Atlas and they use this samples to test these differences between the qualities and properties because there is some times you can rank the qualities in a certain way but maybe your experience in a sense of another part is not like this and I provide the time samples that were not samples designed specifically for my Atlas. I found at times samples around that I used to frame the atlas it could be interesting to design the samples useful and very specific for my Atlas. This is an improvement that I would like to maybe – I don’t know when – but I would like to do it.

6. Can you see this being implemented in a professional environment?

Yes, of course it is possible to improve and implement it also for a professional design because also professionals need to understand this gap that exists between qualities and properties and above all the professionals that are not educated enough in a material sensibility. They could be – they could have a good advantage from this user tool like this. I can also say that the extra-sensorial material atlas at the time was designed for students but of course improving the material sample collection designed specifically for the Atlas is possible to improve the tool for professionals.

During the review of the Atlas, I questioned a few possible developments of the research and pin-pointed some variables.

7. Do you think there could be variations on the sensorial qualities of the materials depending on the scale of the samples provided by the Atlas? If so, how would you attempt to minimise these variations?

Of course it is for sure possible to have a lot of variation in the sensorial qualities of the materials independent of the scale of the samples, the scale, the dimension, the shape as I told you before, I think that if in the future we will be able to design specific samples for the Atlas. It could because try to control some variables like dimension, shape, thickness and everything. We can also but control a little - or maybe have under control - the feeling of the user of this part, because you can have a perception of materials is very different. If the same material is shaped in a different form or in different dimensions this is for sure is a also explaining a very good way the physiological domain so in the study that are a part of the physiological discipline. I don’t know if it is possible to minimise these variations, my aim was not to get the ISTITUTO MARANGONI

97 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA precise quantity, the precise number, the precise -let’s say quantity of the – I never try to measure the sensation, I only would like to make aware the future designer that there is this gap and to become more sensitive and more aware about this gap is a good for a future designer because they can control, and they can design better with the material if they aware of their own sensorial perception so I don’t know if it is clear, but it is difficult for me to explain in English, but I never wanted to create a tool able to measure and to give you the best data to design.

My aim was to transmit awareness in this part of the process of design. To minimise this variation was not one of my aims.

8. Why did you choose to include a description of the sensorial qualities of the materials on the theoretical tables? Do you not think that maybe by doing that you take away the opportunity for the person interacting with the material to reflect deeper into the quality of the sensorial experience?

I decided to include the description of the sensorial qualities because a you know this is an educational tool and for that reason I would like to transmit into education so also because there are a lot of description and definition of sensorial qualities for example if you focus on texture, you can find a lot of definitions of texture and I would like to include in the tool to transmit my own idea, so what I study and what I decided that for me was texture for examples so for that person I decided to put in the Atlas.

And my idea was that doing like this, I helped the user in understanding what the texture is and I never thought that I take away the opportunity of the user to reflect deeper in the quality because a big part of the Atlas is educated so before you studied, you understand what texture is and then you are more aware of what you are touching for example. So, this was my aim, my idea.

9. Do you think there is a possibility to characterise the emotional qualities of materials based on their sensorial qualities?

Yes, of course, there is the possibility to characterise the emotional part because the sensorial part and expressive qualities of material are the basis of emotion so are topics that are very connected because through the perception, you can get emotion, the quality of the sensorial perception – give you the quality of the emotion it is very difficult in this case to decide a hierarchy of these things because sometimes you can realise the quality of what you are touching for example. But it can be also the opposite, so during and thanks for emotion you can realise that you got this emotion because you touched something, and you can focus on the sensorial qualities of what you were touching for example. So, this the idea. I did also a dissertation on this part on the emotional qualities of material. But are things that are very connected between them, it is difficult to speak about emotion without speaking about sensorial perception or expressivity of a material. At the beginning, my research was titles ‘Aesthetic quality of material’ but I decided to change because I would like to put in evidence as the… so don’t link the idea of my research with the beauty because sometimes aesthetics is synonymous of beauty or ugly things but if you think to the etymology of the world aesthetics is that something that you can perceive by senses and can create you an ISTITUTO MARANGONI

98 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

emotion so this is the factor but to make more explicit things either side of to call it expressive sensorial.

10. Would you have done anything differently? What are the next steps to this research?

Yes, I would like to do something a different way, as I told you, design in a specific way sample educated for the tool and of course I would like to improve the graph because it is very old style so I mean the graphics and the design of the tool in a physical (pause). The tool in terms of the tables, the boards and everything needs to be upgraded and improved and for the future, I would like to focus in a specific material class. Could be an idea and maybe include these qualities that at the time I discluded as… for example, colour because I focused only in a some specific sensorial qualities but I excluded others that are now its possible to include it and what I did it in the next year was to design material because through the another research that I called ‘Do it yourself materials’ I realised how its useful to have this background on expressive sensorial characterisation of materials because when you are also able to design your own material, you are also able to design and to characterise your material so from a sensorial expressive point of view, I mean at the beginning of the research, I felt that this tool could be very useful to understand materials and to make aware that the future designer of what they could do and what they can use to understand the material world. But now I know that is very useful also to design your material.

This is the big improvement that I did in the last days, last years.

Interview 3 – João Paulo Lopes How designing for material experiences can be embedded into a routine design practice?

The aim of this interview is to better understand the design process of a practitioner currently working with tactile design. He is a Brazilian graphic designer that utilises of material exploration to produce digital designs.

1. What does tactile design mean to you and how do you use it?

Techniques and/or analogous craft or sculpture processes, for the use in digital design.

When making a sculpture, I photography it or film it to be used digitally either in video or image format.

2. What were the reasons for you to pursuit tactile design?

My father was a carpenter and having studied design I realised I could utilise both [designing] techniques since I am not the [designer] type to dive into the study of advanced editing softwares.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

99 WINTER 2020

LARISSA BRAGA 3. How do you approach a project from a tactile perspective?

Executive planning, predicting loss of time and material. My biggest worry is with the deadline, given the process of material alteration can be more complicated compared to the digital [design process].

4. How do you teach students how to implement tactile design in their practice?

In the way of “thinking craft� during all stages [of the design process]. From constructing a font and photographing it, to solving a situation in pre-production and not during editing, and even [when] making a project in stop motion, instead of in 3D, for example.

5. What is the impact of tactile design in the viewers/users? Do you feel a difference in the level of engagement in projects that utilise of the tactile rich characteristics?

The craft, or tactile as the name says, is something palpable and human; therefore, [tactile design] comes closer to people, natural[ly]; and as the whole market is going in the opposite direction, the craft turns out to be something different and daring.

6. What criteria do you use to select your materials?

According to demand. I do not accumulate or keep any spare material, for example. Each project has a requirement, and most times are ordinary materials, non-professional or affordable.

7. Have you ever come across any of the tools available for the experiential qualities of materials? If not, these are some examples - Do you think these can be useful to your practice?

Tools for handicraft, scalpels, contact glue, wood glue and fast-drying glue. But many things are done in improv as it is needed. The most unexpected tool is the scalpel, it cuts very precisely and [it comes with] multiple blade sizes and curvatures and much more affordable.

8. Do you believe there can be a meaningful selection of materials to enhance the impact of the tactile design?

The choice of right material directly impacts the result, from the quality, to texture, colours, thicknesses and more.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

100 WINTER 2020

Affective Response to Tactile Experiences A design theory of the affective qualities of materials, a study towards a toolkit

9. Do you believe there is an emotional level to how materials are perceived? Can that be used in the design of an image?

Yes, many times, this [emotional] process happens in a very unconscious way. The attention to care, affection, careful concern in the details when creating such a piece [are all design factors that contribute to the final product]. In a hypothetical situation: If the “company� was careful enough to create such an advertising piece, [the client] can predict the level the care or refinement that the product or service will have.

ISTITUTO MARANGONI

101 WINTER 2020