Content uploaded by Huang-Ming Chang
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Huang-Ming Chang on Sep 07, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
A. Marcus (Ed.): DUXU 2014, Part IV, LNCS 8520, pp. 220–231, 2014.
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating
Emotional Experience
Huang-Ming Chang1,2,*, Marta Díaz2, Andreu Català2,
Wei Chen1, and Matthias Rauterberg1
1 Designed Intelligence Group, Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of
Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
2 CETpD Research Center, Technical University of Catalonia, Vilanova i la Geltrú, Spain
{h.m.chang,w.chen,g.w.m.rauterberg}@tue.nl,
{marta.diaz,andreu.catala}@upc.edu
Abstract. Emotion is an essential part of user experience. While researchers are
striving for new research tools for evaluate emotional experiences in design,
designers have been using experience-based tools for studying emotions in
practice, such as mood boards. Mood boards were developed for communicat-
ing emotional qualities between designers and clients, but have not yet been
considered as an evaluation tool for investigating emotional experience. In t
his study we examined whether design students and non-design students have
similar criteria in evaluating these mood boards. The results showed that the
inter-rater reliability among all participants were considerably high, which
suggested that mood boards are potential to be used as an evaluation tool for
research on emotion.
Keywords: mood boards, emotion, evaluation tool, user experience.
1 Introduction
In recent years, the focus of human-computer interaction (HCI) has shifted from func-
tionality and usability to ‘humans’ [1]. The concept of user experience (UX) is widely
embraced by the HCI community and raises many new challenges to researchers and
designers [2]. As emotion is an essential part of our mental lives, one of the main
challenges is to investigate the emotional aspect of user experience [3], and deliver
these observed emotional qualities back to designers for initiating design processes
[4]. While many researchers are striving for new tools to investigate emotions in de-
sign, designers have been using several experience-based tools for their work and
some of these tools may be useful for evaluating emotions.
The use of mood boards is versatile. It has long been used for communicating emo-
tional qualities between designers and clients [5], and the process of mood board
making also serves as a resource for creative thinking [6]. While making mood boards
has become an essential skill for design practice, we have seen its potential to be a
research tool specifically for measuring non-verbal emotional experience. In the
present study, we first review the current development of emotion evaluation tools in
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 221
design research, and revisit the procedure of making mood boards from a psychologi-
cal perspective. Based on this framework, we conducted an experiment to examine
the effectiveness of mood boards in expressing emotional qualities across interpreta-
tions of people with design and non-design backgrounds, and discuss how this new
finding may inform future research on emotions.
2 A Psychological Perspective on Mood Boards
Since emotion is a psychological phenomenon that cannot be directly captured, re-
search on emotion usually relies on a stimulus-response paradigm, which encom-
passes emotion elicitation and emotion recognition [7]. Researchers are able to infer
the emotional quality that is induced in the subject according to the content of the
stimuli and the corresponding emotional responses. For example, a subject might have
experienced happiness because (1) the stimuli were funny pictures and (2) the subject
also reported happiness. This stimulus-response paradigm has directed most of the
contemporary psychological research on emotion, and also influenced other related
areas, such as design research on emotions.
2.1 Emotion Evaluation Tools in the Design Field
Kansei Engineering [8] was developed as a consumer-oriented approach for new
product development. Researchers in Kansei Engineering intend to investigate the
relationship between consumers’ psychological feelings and product features, such
form, shape, color, and any perceptual qualities. Designers can thus generate new
product concepts by manipulating product features. This method can also be used to
evaluate qualities of new concept at the early stage of design process [9]. The Japa-
nese word ‘Kansei’ encompasses broad concepts, referring to all of which are con-
ceived as mental responses to external stimuli, including emotion, senses, and aesthet-
ics [8]. Research in Kansei Engineering often uses semantic scales with perceptual
and emotional qualities, which may give rise to some concerns about cultural differ-
ences and product categories [10]. For example, the expression in Japanese and Eng-
lish on certain perceptual qualities may differ; kitchen appliances and automobiles
should use different sets of semantic scales.
Jordan [11] developed a questionnaire specifically for evaluating positive emotional
experience about products. This questionnaire encompasses 14 questions about specific
emotions, such as entertained, excited, and satisfaction. Taking into account the feasi-
bility across products and cultures, this questionnaire provided optional open-ended
questions that allowed the experimenter and the subject to add new words. While Kan-
sei Engineering and Jordan’s questionnaire focused on physical products, several new
evaluation tools for measuring user experience were proposed in recent years. User
experience questionnaire (UEQ) [12] used a similar approach to Kansei Engineering
but shifted the focus from products to users. Thus, UEQ removed adjectives describing
physical appearance of physical products (e.g. shape and color) and included more
words for describing cognitive load, emotional feelings and preferences.
222 H.-M. Chang et al.
While most evaluation tools are intended to derive immediate responses from sub-
jects, a tool called iScale [13] was developed for observing long-term, continuous user
experiences. This tool requires users to recall their long-term experiences periodically
while using a new product in their daily lives. Unlike other tools using likert scales,
iScale takes a novel approach, asking users to draw a curve to indicate the changes in
their emotional experiences related to the product. However, this curve-drawing ap-
proach does not aim to acquire exact emotional qualities, but to serve as a reference for
tracing pleasant or unpleasant events that occurred, which allows designers to ‘recon-
struct’ the past and solve potential problems of the product accordingly.
However, the abovementioned evaluation tools are language dependent. Although
the interpretations in affective meaning is universal at a certain degree [14], various
modalities of emotional responses are universally valid and might benefit non-verbal
emotion communications, such as facial expressions [15]. PrEmo [16] was developed
based on this assumption, using facial expressions and body gestures with animated
cartoon characters to illustrate different emotional qualities. Subjects could thus fill
this questionnaire through self-reports as an instrument for measuring consumers’
emotional responses specifically to product appearance.
In addition to the abovementioned tools, there are more new tools released in re-
cent years, e.g. [17, 18]. Most design researchers apply research-based approach to
investigate product emotions [4] and endeavor to develop systematic procedures for
evaluating emotional experience. However, how to study emotion in design practice is
rarely discussed. Over the past years, designers have been using experience-based
tools, such as mood boards, to study emotions. Comparing to systematic tools, expe-
rience-based tools are usually quick-and-dirty solutions and do not have strict term of
use. On the other hand, the validity of experience-based tools is difficult to measure
so that this kind of tool is rarely discussed in empirical studies
2.2 Revisiting ‘Mood Boards’
Mood boards are a collection of visual images gathered together to represent an emo-
tional responses to a design brief [19]. It is a visual and sensory instrument for de-
signers to communicate with each other and also with the clients [6]. This tool func-
tions as a non-verbal medium communicating complex and delicate emotional quali-
ties that are difficult to express through languages. The process of mood board mak-
ing can stimulate insightful discussions [6, 19], providing inspirations at the early
stage of concept development [9]. In order to support mood board making, various
modalities of interactive technologies were applied to developing digital mood board
[20], which enable designers and clients to co-create mood boards effectively.
Traditionally, mood board making were solely for designers. Since mood board
making is technically easy and simple, some researchers have tried to use mood
boards as a catalyst in focus groups [21]. Similar to the contextmapping approach
[22], mood board making may trigger more inputs from target users and help design-
ers discover deeper insights about user needs and aspiration towards products. This
has shown the potential of mood boards to be used as a tool for capturing emotional
experiences in different contexts. Today, mood board making has become an essential
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 223
skill for designers. Several studies have discussed how to teach and apply this tech-
nique in design education [5, 19, 23]. It appears that most designers are trained to
translate emotional qualities into mood boards – a visual manifestation that associates
with the given content, e.g. products and brands. However, this technique did not gain
adequate credits in terms of scientific evidence. It is necessary to assess the validity of
mood boards to be an effective tool for studying emotions in design research.
2.3 Mood Boards as an Emotion Evaluation Tool for Designers
A general context of use of mood boards can be illustrated as follows (see Fig. 1). In
the early stage of the design process, one of the primary tasks is to define emotional
qualities of the new product. To initiate this undertaking, designers usually start with
the ‘design theme’ of the given project, such as the brand image of the client and the
marketing position of the new product. After a thorough understanding of the theme,
designers can thus make mood boards to visualize predefined emotional qualities.
These mood boards serve as part of the key references for later stages of product de-
velopment. Designers have to discuss with their clients about the mood boards to
identify the common goal of the project, and also talk with target users in order to
obtain useful insights.
Fig. 1. A psychological perspective on mood board making in design practice
From a psychological perspective, the above process can be decomposed into two
stimuli-response processes. The ‘design theme’ of the given project can be conceived
as a mutual affective stimulus to bot designers and users/clients. After both of them
have been primed with the emotional experience, designers make mood boards as a
self-report outcome, and then users/clients provide their evaluation according to their
subjective emotional experience. Designers need to modify their mood boards until a
certain consensus has been built.
A preliminary studies have revealed that design students share a common percep-
tion of mood boards [23]. The author recruited a group of design students to create
mood boards according to two general terms, ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’, and asked
them to give ratings to the mood boards created by other students depending on how
well the mood boards represent the concept of masculine and feminine. The results
suggested a consistency for both male and female students in terms of the concept of
‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’. This finding is promising, but numbers of concerns need
to be taken into account in order to prove the validity of mood boards as a useful tool
in a more complex design task.
224 H.-M. Chang et al.
First of all, it is necessary to verify if mood boards are emotionally meaningful for
both designers and users/clients (i.e. individuals who are not trained as a designer).
While most designers are trained to make mood boards, they are also experienced in
interpreting and justifying mood boards. Although mood boards are assumed to be a
non-verbal emotional communication tool, it has not yet clarified if users share the
same underlying criteria in justifying mood boards with designers. In order to apply
mood boards as a universal tool for evaluating emotions for the general population, it
is important to examine whether mood boards can be self-explained affective content
to both designers and users.
Second, in the study of [23] the raters (i.e. the design students) also participated in
the task of making mood boards. This would lead to a priming effect because the
raters had thought attentively about the themes for creating mood boards, and would
have anticipated what elements might be included in the final mood boards. We pro-
pose to include users as the role of rater in order to avoid priming effects, and this
setting is also closer to how mood board making is applied in design practice.
Lastly, the stimuli for eliciting emotions in designers and users should be more
immersive, emotionally rich, and generic. Most previous studies used static pictures
to demonstrate the visual appearance of products, such as color, shape, and materials
[8, 16]. However, this content is too feature specific, and is not suitable for the early
stage of product development. Moreover, the selection of media type should also be
taken into account. Several psychological studies have suggested that film clips are an
effective media type for eliciting emotions [7, 24, 25]. Film clips are relatively short,
intuitively powerful, and easily accessible; the clips and the procedure for viewing
them can be standardized across participants [26].
We consider TV commercials as a proper resource for affective stimuli in our
study. TV commercials have long been used in research on emotions specifically for
consumer psychology [27]. TV commercials are suitable for our research because
affective reactions to TV commercials are highly related to buying behaviors [28] and
the symbolic meaning of advertisement is an essential element in visual communica-
tions between products and consumers [29]. Moreover, mood board making is closely
related to the brand image of the product as it is often used in the early stage of prod-
uct development [21].
The logic of our study is as follows. TV commercials of specific brands serve as
affective stimuli. At the first stage, several professional designers would be recruited
to create mood boards for each of the selected commercials. Mood board making in
the present study should focus on the emotional qualities rather than design features.
The mood boards are considered as representations of the emotional qualities deli-
vered by the TV commercials. In the second stage – the experiment – participants are
presented with the same TV commercials. After watching each commercial, partici-
pant need to compare their emotional feelings with the emotional qualities represented
by the mood boards and gives rankings based on their subjective evaluation.
3 Making Mood Boards
The products of the TV commercials should belong to the same category in order
that the results for the two commercials can be comparable. Two TV commercials of
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 225
automobile brands, BMW [30] and Jeep [31], were selected as affective stimuli. Both
of these two commercials were one minute long. The content of these two commer-
cials represents feminine and masculine images based on the definition of Jungian
theory of archetypes on Anima and Hero [32]. The selection process followed our
previous work on analyzing symbolic meanings in modern movies [33].
Twelve Taiwanese professional designers were invited to participate in mood
board making. They first watched one of the two commercials and created an image-
only mood board, and repeated the same task for the other commercial. The display of
the two commercials followed a random order. Designers were asked to make mood
boards to describe their own emotional feelings about the content of the commercials
and ignore their preoccupied impressions about the brand and its product features. In
order to standardize the resources they used for creating mood boards, an online mood
board making software called ‘moodshare’ [34] was used to perform the task. There-
fore, 24 mood boards were created for the later experiment.
4 Experiment
While it has been revealed that mood boards are valid for designers, in this experi-
ment we intended to verify whether non-design students and design students gave
similar rankings over mood boards. If the answer was positive, mood boards could
thus be useful for investigating emotional experience among individuals who were
with or without a design background. A qualitative questionnaire was applied to col-
lect more information about the criteria for justifying the quality of the mood boards.
Our experiment was conducted at the Usability Laboratory of CETpD research
center at the Polytechnic University of Catalonia, and the design studio of the De-
partment of Industrial Design at National Taiwan University of Technology. There
were 36 design students and 16 non-design students, including 25 Females and 27
males, volunteered to participate in our experiment. The average age of the partici-
pants was 24.46 years old (SD = 4.96). The students were originally from 11 coun-
tries; 22 participants were from Asia; 26 were from Europe; 4 were from South Amer-
ica. The experiment followed a within-subject design. Each session accommodated
one participant and thus every participant performed all the tasks respectively.
4.1 Procedure
The procedure of our experiment is as follows (see fig. 2). Firstly, an introduction was
given to the participant and the participant needed to fill in an informed consent form
for the experiment. After signing the agreement, the participant was seated in our
laboratory, which was arranged as a usual living room to make the participant feel
comfortable and relaxed. The visual part of the video was projected onto a white wall
(display dimensions are 3m x 2m) while the audio part of the video was delivered via
wireless headphones. When the above setting was ready, the light in the laboratory
was dimmed in order to make the participant more immersed in the video presenta-
tions. The two TV commercials were play in random order. After finishing viewing
226 H.-M. Chang et al.
one of the videos, the participant was then asked to fill the questionnaire. The ques-
tionnaire encompassed two parts; the first part was providing keywords to describe
his or her emotional experience about the video; the second part was to rank mood
boards according to the participant’s own emotional experiences about the video.
Fig. 2. The procedure of the experiment. First, the participant watched one of the two commer-
cials, wrote down keywords and then gave rankings for mood boards. The same order repeated
for the other commercial.
The keywords served as qualitative data that represented the participant’s per-
ceived emotional qualities and denoted the prominent elements that attracted his or
her attention. The participant was asked to focus on the content of the video rather
than the brand of the commercial although the influence of the brand of the commer-
cial might still affect the judgment of the participant. After this part of questionnaire
was finished, the participant was led to the wall that presented mood boards corres-
ponding to the given commercial. All the mood boards were presented at the same
time in order to provide an overview, and the participant could look closer into each
mood board to give rankings. The mood boards were created earlier by professional
designers in the first stage, representing the emotional qualities that were perceived
and expressed by them. The participant was asked to give rankings for the 12 mood
boards for each commercial according to his or her overall viewing experience. The
mood board that was most relevant should be ranked as number 1, and the second
relevant as number 2, down to the least relevant which is number 12. The participant
performed the same task for both the two commercials respectively.
4.2 Results
In most cases, a Pearson correlation is a valid estimator of inter-rater reliability, but
only when meaningful pairings are available between two raters, but it is not suitable
for more than two raters. An intra-class correlation (ICC) was developed for estimating
inter-rater reliability on quantitative data [35]. We applied the analysis on intra-class
correlation using a two-way-random, average-measure model. The results indicated
that the inter-rater reliability among all rankings given by all participants is remarkably
high (ICC(2, 52) = 0.939, F(23,1175) = 15.7 , p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval
for ICC population values: 0.898 < ICC < 0.969), which indicates that design and
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 227
non-design students showed similar opinions on how the mood boards matched their
emotional experience. In order to examine if there are significant differences between
the rankings of mood boards, we used a non-parametric repeated-measures analysis of
variance, i.e. the Friedman Test. For the mood boards of BMW commercial, a Fried-
man test revealed a significant effect of Group on Value (X2(11) = 60.461, p < 0.001).
Similarly, the same test on the rankings for the mood boards of the Jeep commercial
also revealed a significant effect (X2(11) = 198.855, p < 0.001). The results suggested
that there are significant main effects on the rankings of the mood boards for the two
commercials respectively.
Table 1. The results of the descriptive analyses and the post-hoc test for pairwise comparison
on the rankings for the mood boards. Twelve designers participated in this study (ID
alphabetically ranging from A to L). Only the top 3 and the bottom 3 of the twelve mood
boards are reported.
BMW Commercial (Anima) Jeep Commercial (Hero)
ID Ranking Post-hoc ID Ranking Post-hoc
Top 3
K 4.80 (SD=3.23) K-H: p = 0.003
K-B: p < 0.001
K-C: p < 0.001
E-H: p = 0.006
E-B: p < 0.001
E-C: p < 0.001
D-H: p = 0.028
D-B: p = 0.002
D-C: p < 0.001
G 3.65 (SD=2.79) G-H: p < 0.001
G- I: p < 0.001
G-C: p < 0.001
K-H: p < 0.001
K- I: p < 0.001
K-C: p < 0.001
E-H: p < 0.001
E- I: p < 0.001
E-C: p < 0.001
E 4.92 (SD=3.17) K 3.80 (SD=2.87)
D 5.22 (SD=3.01) E 4.33 (SD=3.25)
Bottom 3
H 7.57 (SD=3.13) H 8.82 (SD=2.45)
B 8.02 (SD=3.25) I 9.55 (SD=2.60)
C 8.43 (SD=2.68) C 9.88 (SD=2.44)
Thus, we proceeded to post-hoc analyses. The Wilcoxon-Nemenyi-McDonald-
Thompson test was developed specifically for a post-hoc test that enables pairwise
comparisons for non-parametric repeated measures data [36]. In Table 1, we pre-
sented the results of descriptive analyses and the pairwise comparisons between the
top three and bottom three mood boards for both two commercials. It needs to be
noted that each of the top three mood boards is significantly better than any of the
bottom three mood boards. It is noticeable that part of the top three and bottom three
mood boards for BMW and Jeep commercials were made by the same designers
(designer K and E in top 3;designer H and C in bottom 3). The top ranked mood
boards for the two commercials are presented in Fig. 3 and 4. It can be seen that the
numbers of the images included in each mood board are different. We performed
Person’s Chi-squared test to examine if there is a significant correlation between the
number of the images in a mood board and its ranking. The results showed that there
was a negative correlation between the numbers of images and rankings (r = - 0.17, n
= 1224, p < 0.001). The results were reasonable because more images could accom-
modate richer information that communicates trivial emotional qualities.
228 H.-M. Chang et al.
Fig. 3. The top ranked mood board for the BMW commercial (by designer ‘K’ in Table 1.)
Fig. 4. The top ranked mood board for the Jeep commercial (by designer ‘G’ in Table 1.)
Table 2. The keywords provided by the participants for the two commercials, ordered by the
average counts of the appearance of the words in the coding themes
BMW Commercial (Anima)
Theme Average Counts Examples
Superior 1.31 (SD=1.39) Modern, Admirable, Quality, Aesthetic, Stylish, Art
Home 1.25 (SD=1.19) Relaxing, Happy, Comfort, Safe, Enjoy, Life, Warm
Sensual 1.19 (SD=1.34) Breeze, Air, Floating, Soft, Vibration, Smooth, Gentle
Elegance 1.10 (SD=1.09) Tranquil, Calm, Peace, Harmonious, Slow, Steady
Nature 1.08 (SD=1.45) Freedom, Liberty, Adventure, Explore, Wild, Jump
Strength 1.00 (SD=1.07) Velocity, Power, Momentum, Sprint, Streamline, Intense
Feminine 1.00 (SD=1.31) Emotional, Attractive, Desire, Sexy, Dream, Reminiscing
Jeep Commercial (Hero)
Craft 1.52 (SD=1.42) Handmade, Perfection, Concentrate, Texture, Precision
Strength 1.25 (SD=1.52) Fight, Strong, Rise, Tension, Heavy, Robust, Force
Trials 1.19 (SD=1.68) Strive, Lonely, Challenge, Battle, Pain, Sweat, Frustrated
Hero 1.08 (SD=1.22) Epic, Brave, Passion, Determination, Honest, Honor
Rebirth 0.79 (SD=1.04) New life, Achievement, New horizon, Job well done
Mental 0.77 (SD=1.06) Expectation, Projection, Motivation, Ambitious, Intention
The keywords given by the participants serve as references for inferring the under-
lying criteria that were used for ranking the mood boards. We applied the Ground
theory to code the keywords in order to identify various themes [37]. After coding, we
conducted a descriptive analysis on the numbers of appearance of words in each
theme (see Table 2). It can be seen that the participants rarely refer to certain emo-
tional qualities directly, but used a large amount of sensory words, analogies, and
metaphors. Combining the keywords in the same theme allowed us to associate the
emotional qualities perceived by the participants, e.g. the feeling of being home.
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 229
5 Discussion
These preliminary results have confirmed the reliability of using mood boards as a
tool for investigating emotional experience among a general population. Furthermore,
since the mood boards used in our study were made without adding any text, it has
revealed the capability of mood boards to express non-verbal emotional qualities.
Traditional research on emotion tends to use direct measurement, such as self-reports
on specific emotional qualities, such as ‘excited’. Although this approach is effective
in most cases, it is prone to filter out trivial emotional qualities that are difficult to
express through languages. It seems that mood boards are potential to be a useful
alternative measure that applies an indirect approach, using visual images as cues for
associating complex, trivial emotional qualities. Since mood boards are language
independent, it may overcome the limitation of traditional approaches.
Designers are usually assumed to be more sensitive to affective content than users
and clients because designers are more experienced in visualizing emotional qualities.
However, it appears that users and clients also share similar criteria for judging visual
affective content. This is probably because judging mood boards mainly relies on
association and intuition. The nature of mood boards is sensorial, experiential and
rich in content; interpreting the emotional qualities in mood boards cannot be logical-
ly reasoned. This also resonates with several psychological studies [38].
6 Conclusion
The present study has shown the potential of using mood boards as an evaluation tool
for studying emotional experience. Mood boards are a generic tool that is applicable
in various contexts of use and most designers are familiar with this tool. For future
work, applying mood boards in research on user experience is a promising direction
to proceed. Investigating the relationship between design content and corresponding
emotional qualities is also another intriguing topic worth researching.
Acknowledgments. This work was supported in part by the Erasmus Mundus Joint
Doctorate in Interactive and Cognitive Environments, which is funded by the EACEA
Agency of the European Commission under EMJD ICE FPA n 2010-0012.
References
1. Redström, J.: Towards user design? On the shift from object to user as the subject of
design. Des. Stud. 27, 123–139 (2006)
2. Law, E.L.-C., Roto, V., Hassenzahl, M., Vermeeren, A., Kort, J.: Understanding, scoping
and defining user experience. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2009, pp. 719–728. ACM Press, New York
(2009)
3. Hassenzahl, M.: Emotions can be quite ephemeral; we cannot design them. Interactions 11,
46 (2004)
230 H.-M. Chang et al.
4. Desmet, P.M.A., Porcelijn, R., Dijk, M.B.: Emotional design; Application of a research-
based design approach. Knowledge, Technol. Policy 20, 141–155 (2007)
5. Cassidy, T.D.: Mood boards: Current practice in learning and teaching strategies and
students’ understanding of the process. Int. J. Fash. Des. Technol. Educ. 1, 43–54 (2008)
6. McDonagh, D., Storer, I.: Mood boards as a design catalyst and resource: Researching an
under-researched area. Des. J. 7, 16–31 (2004)
7. Rottenberg, J., Ray, R.D., Gross, J.J.: Emotion elicitation using films. In: Coan, J.A.,
Allen, J.J.B. (eds.) Handbook of Emotion Elicitation and Assessment, pp. 9–28. Oxford
University Press, Oxford (2007)
8. Nagamachi, M.: Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for
product development. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 15, 3–11 (1995)
9. Barnes, C., Lillford, S.P.: Decision support for the design of affective products. J. Eng.
Des. 20, 477–492 (2009)
10. Khalid, H.M.: Customer emotional needs in product design. Concurr. Eng. 14, 197–206
(2006)
11. Jordan, P.W.: Designing Pleasurable Products. Taylor & Francis, London (2000)
12. Laugwitz, B., Held, T., Schrepp, M.: Construction and evaluation of a user experience
questionnaire. In: Holzinger, A. (ed.) USAB 2008. LNCS, vol. 5298, pp. 63–76. Springer,
Heidelberg (2008)
13. Karapanos, E., Martens, J.-B., Hassenzahl, M.: Reconstructing experiences with iScale.
Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 70, 849–865 (2012)
14. Osgood, C.E., May, W.H., Miron, M.S.: Cross-Cultural Universals of Affective Meaning.
University of Illinois Press, Champaign (1975)
15. Ekman, P.: Strong evidence for universals in facial expressions: A reply to Russell’s
mistaken critique. Psychol. Bull. 115, 268–287 (1994)
16. Desmet, P.M.A., Monk, A.F., Overbeeke, K.: Measuring emotion: Development and
application of an instrument to measure emotional responses to products. In: Blythe, M.A.,
Monk, A.F., Overbeeke, K., Wright, P.C. (eds.) Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment,
pp. 111–123. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)
17. Huisman, G., van Hout, M., van Dijk, B., van der Geest, T., Heylen, D.: LEMtool – Measuring
emotions in visual interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, CHI 2013, pp. 351–360. ACM Press, New York (2013)
18. Hole, L., Williams, O.: The emotion sampling device (ESD). In: Proceedings of the 21st
British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers, pp. 177–178 (2007)
19. Garner, S., McDonagh-Philp, D.: Problem interpretation and resolution via visual stimuli:
The use of “mood boards” in design education. Int. J. Art Des. Educ. 20, 57–64 (2001)
20. Lucero, A., Aliakseyeu, D., Martens, J.-B.: Funky wall: Presenting mood boards using
gesture, speech and visuals. In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced
Visual Interfaces, AVI 2008, pp. 425–428. ACM Press, New York (2008)
21. McDonagh, D., Bruseberg, A., Haslam, C.: Visual product evaluation: Exploring users’
emotional relationships with products. Appl. Ergon. 33, 231–240 (2002)
22. Visser, F.S., Stappers, P.J., van der Lugt, R., Sanders, E.B.-N.: Contextmapping: experiences
from practice. CoDesign 1, 119–149 (2005)
23. McDonagh, D., Denton, H.: Exploring the degree to which individual students share a
common perception of specific mood boards: Observations relating to teaching, learning
and team-based design. Des. Stud. 26, 35–53 (2005)
24. Philippot, P.: Inducing and assessing differentiated emotion-feeling states in the laboratory.
Cogn. Emot. 7, 171–193 (1993)
Mood Boards as a Universal Tool for Investigating Emotional Experience 231
25. Gross, J.J., Levenson, R.W.: Emotion elicitation using films. Cogn. Emot. 9, 87–108
(1995)
26. Lench, H.C., Flores, S.A., Bench, S.W.: Discrete emotions predict changes in cognition,
judgment, experience, behavior, and physiology: A meta-analysis of experimental emotion
elicitations. Psychol. Bull. 137, 834–855 (2011)
27. Edell, J.A., Burke, M.C.: The power of feelings in understanding advertising effects. J.
Consum. Res. 14, 421–433 (1987)
28. Baumgartner, H., Sujan, M., Padgett, D.: Patterns of affective reactions to advertisements:
The integration of moment-to-moment responses into overall judgments. J. Mark. Res. 34,
219–232 (1997)
29. Rompay, T., Pruyn, A., Tieke, P.: Symbolic meaning integration in design and its
influence on product and brand evaluation. Int. J. Des. 3, 19–26 (2009)
30. Rathod, P.: BMW - Express your feeling,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWDzRTMhSe0&hd=1
31. SistemasNormalesHD: Jeep Grand Cherokee - Official Commercial (2014),
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNaYZvJo4rQ&hd=1
32. Jung, C.G.: Man and His Symbols. Doubleday, Garden City (1964)
33. Chang, H.-M., Ivonin, L., Diaz, M., Catala, A., Chen, W., Rauterberg, M.: From mytholo-
gy to psychology: Identifying archetypal symbols in movies. Technoetic Arts 11, 99–113
(2013)
34. Mooooodle Limited: MoodShare, http://www.moodshare.co/
35. Shrout, P.E., Fleiss, J.L.: Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Psychol. Bull. 86, 420–428 (1979)
36. Hollander, M., Wolfe, D.A.: Nonparametric Statistical Methods. Wiley-Interscience,
Hoboken (1999)
37. Ryan, G.W., Bernard, H.R.: Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15, 85–109
(2003)
38. Kahneman, D.: Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics. Am.
Econ. Rev. 93, 1449–1475 (2003)
