| 李晓娇,马彧,陈永超.基于梳棉机外观设计的专家和用户语义评价比较研究[J].包装工程,2022,43(4):258-264. |
| 基于梳棉机外观设计的专家和用户语义评价比较研究 |
| A Comparative Study on Semantic Evaluation of Experts and Users Based on Carding Machine Appearance Design |
| 投稿时间：2021-09-10 |
| DOI：10.19554/j.cnki.1001-3563.2022.04.032 |
| 中文关键词: 专家 用户 语义 设计评价 梳棉机 |
| 英文关键词: expert user semantic design evaluation carding machine |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: |
| 全文下载次数: |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 研究专家与用户对产品外观语义认知及设计语义评价结果的差异，探索在产品研发的初步评价环节，小样本专家评价能否替代或预测用户评价。方法 进行两个阶段的问卷调查。第一阶段，统计专家与用户的设计认知语义计数，筛选高频词汇作为第二阶段的评价语义。第二阶段，分别进行较小的专家样本和较大的用户样本的问卷调查，应用典型相关分析方法，对专家与用户语义评价结果进行相关分析，进一步应用聚类分析法，检验评价结果的一致性。结果 以梳棉机外观设计为对象，选取12款梳棉机为刺激材料，专家语义第1集合与用户语义第1集合具有较强相关性(Pearson’s r=0.938，F=2.542，p=0.054)，2类聚类结果显示专家语义与用户语义评价结果完全一致，3类聚类不一致率仅为8.333%。结论 表面上看，专家语义与用户语义不同，体现出专家与用户对设计的认知差异，但最终的评价结果具有一致性。因此，小样本的专家语义评价，能够在一定程度上预测用户语义评价结果，该方法能够帮助设计研发团队掌握和预测用户的设计评价与认知，为纺机企业设计初评价阶段节约一定的成本投入。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| This paper aims to focus on the differences between experts and users in product appearance semantic cognition and design semantic evaluation results, and explore whether a small sample of expert evaluation can replace or predict user evaluation in the preliminary evaluation of product development. A two-stage questionnaire survey was conducted. In the first stage, the design cognitive semantics of experts and users are counted, and high-frequency words are selected as evaluation semantics for next stage. In the second stage, a questionnaire survey is conducted among a smaller sample of experts and a larger sample of users. With canonical correlation analysis, the correlation results are calculated from evaluation data of experts and users, and further cluster analysis is used to check the consistency of evaluation results. Based on the carding machine appearance, 12 carding machine are selected as stimulus materials. The first sets of experts’ and users’ semantics evaluation are strongly correlated (Pearson’s r=0.938, F=2.542, p=0.054); the class-II clustering results show that the semantic evaluation results of experts and users are completely consistent, and the inconsistency rate of the class-III clustering is only 8.333%. Expert semantics and user semantics are different, reflecting the difference between experts and users' perceptions of design, but the final evaluation results are consistent. Therefore, a small sample of expert semantic evaluation can predict the results of user semantic evaluation to a certain extent, this method can help the design and development team to master and predict the design evaluation and users cognition, and save a certain amount of cost investment for textile machinery enterprises in the initial evaluation stage of design. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
