Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multisensory MAYA – A Design Thinking Method to Enhance Predictability of Experience Design

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Design, User Experience, and Usability (HCII 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14030))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1134 Accesses

Abstract

The MAYA (“Most Advanced, Yet Acceptable”) is a classic design principle, which aims at balancing the most advanced (novelty) with the yet acceptable (typicality) for enhancing product aesthetics and creating pleasurable experiences. The MAYA principle is established and widely examined, however, it has not been developed into a design thinking method for multisensory experience design purposes. In this paper, we present a multisensory design thinking method for MAYA, that facilitates designers’ problem finding and solving during all phases of a design process. The focus is on developing the design thinking method in a manner that incorporates research knowledge on the five basic senses as well as design reasoning and the iterative nature of design thinking to enhance the predictability of multisensory experience design. The initial thought experiment questions and procedure were tested in a workshop with industrial designers. In the discussion, we elaborate on future development requirements, possibilities, and research directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Altaboli, A., Lin, Y.: Investigating effects of screen layout elements on interface and screen design aesthetics. Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2011, 1–10 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Armstrong, T., Detweiler-Bedell, B.: Beauty as an emotion: the exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 12(4), 305–329 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Banathy, B.H.: Designing Social Systems in a Changing World. Springer, New York (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9981-1

  4. Berlyne, D.: Aesthetics and Psychobiology. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berlyne, D.: Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Hemisphere (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Blijlevens, J., Carbon, C.C., Mugge, R., Schoormans, J.P.: Aesthetic appraisal of product designs: independent effects of typicality and arousal. Br. J. Psychol. 103(1), 44–57 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Blijlevens, J., Gemser, G., Mugge, R.: The importance of being ‘well- laced’: the influence of context on perceived typicality and esthetic appraisal of product appearance. Acta Physiol. 139(1), 178–186 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Blijlevens, J., Thurgood, C., Hekkert, P., Chen, L.L., Leder, H., Whitfield, T.W.: The aesthetic pleasure in design scale: the development of a scale to measure aesthetic pleasure for designed artifacts. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 11(1), 86–98 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Buchanan, R.: Wicked problems in design thinking. Des. Issues 8(2), 5–21 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Calantone, R.J., Kwong, C., Cui, A.S.: Decomposing product innovativeness and its effects on new product success. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 23(5), 408–421 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Churchman, C.W.: Wicked problems. Manag. Sci. 4(14), 141–142 (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., Clarkson, P.J.: Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Des. Stud. 25(6), 547–577 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cross, N.: Designerly ways of knowing. Des. Stud. 3, 221–227 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cross, N.: Natural intelligence in design. Des. Stud. 20(1), 25–39 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dam, R.F.: The Maya principle: design for the future, but balance it with your users’ present. Interact. Des. 17 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Deroy, O., Spence, C.: Crossmodal correspondences: four challenges. Multisens. Res. 29(1–3), 29–48 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Design Council, Framework for Innovation; Design Council’s evolved Double Diamond (2019). https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/. Accessed 08 Feb 2023

  18. Dorst, K., Cross, N.: Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution. Des. Stud. 22(5), 425–437 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gross, A., Silvennoinen, J.: Surprise as a design strategy in goal-oriented mobile applications. In: Rebelo, F., Soares, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, AHFE 2014, pp. 4716–4726. Advances in Human Factors and Ergonomics (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hekkert, P.: Design aesthetics: principles of pleasure in design. Psychol. Sci. 48(2), 157–172 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hekkert, P.: Aesthetic responses to design: a battle of impulses. In: Tinio, P., Smith, J. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Aesthetics and the Arts, pp. 277–299. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., Wieringen, P.C.W.: ‘Most advanced, yet acceptable’: typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. Br. J. Psychol. 94, 111–124 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1348/000712603762842147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Holbrook, M.B., Hirschman, E.C.: The experiential aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies, feelings and fun. J. Consum. Res. 9, 132–140 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hultén, B.: Sensory marketing: the multi-sensory brand-experience concept. Eur. Bus. Rev. 23(3), 256–273 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hultén, B., Broweus, N., van Dijk, M.: Sensory Marketing. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hung, W.-K., Chen, L.-L.: Effects of novelty and its dimensions on aesthetic preference in product design. Int. J. Des. 6(3), 81–90 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Husserl, E.: The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. Northwestern University Press, Evanston (1936)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ivory, M.Y., Sinha, R.R., Hearst, M.A.: Empirically validated web page design metrics. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 53–60. ACM Press (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jokinen, J.P.P., Silvennoinen, J., Kujala, T.: Relating experience goals with visual user interface design. Interact. Comput. 30(5), 378–395 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwy016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, US (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kant, I.: Critique of Pure Reason. English Translation by Paul Guyer and Allen Wood (1998). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1787)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Krishna, A., Schwarz, N.: Sensory marketing, embodiment, and grounded cognition: a review and introduction. J. Consum. Psychol. 24(2), 159–168 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ludden, G., Schifferstein, H., Hekkert, P.: Visual–tactual incongruities in products as sources of surprise. Empir. Stud. Arts 27(1), 61–87 (2009). https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.27.1.d

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Loewy, R.: Never Leave Well Enough Alone. Simon and Schuster (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Michailidou, E., Harper, S., Bechhofer, S.: Visual complexity and aesthetic perception of web pages. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, pp. 215–224. ACM Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Miniukovich, A., De Angeli, A.: Computation of interface aesthetics. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1163–1172. ACM Press (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mononen, L.: Systems thinking and its contribution to understanding future designer thinking. Des. J. 20(Sup1), S4529–S4538 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Muth, C., Westphal-Fitch, G., Carbon, C.-C.: Seeking (dis)order: ordering appeals but slight disorder and complex order trigger interest. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 15(3), 439–457 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Obrist, M., Ranasinghe, N., Spence, C.: Multisensory human–computer interaction. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 107 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Posner, M.I., Keele, S.W.: On the genesis of abstract ideas. J. Exp. Psychol. 77, 353–363 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., Winkielman, P.: Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 8(4), 364–382 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Reinecke, K., Yeh, T., Miratrix, L., Mardiko, R., Zhao, Y., Liu, J., Gajos, K.Z.: Predicting users’ first impressions of website aesthetics with a quantification of perceived visual complexity and colorfulness. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Huma Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2049–2058. ACM Press (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Rousi, R., Silvennoinen, J., Perälä, P., Jokinen, J.P.: Beyond MAYA for game-changing multisensory design. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Academic Mindtrek Conference, pp. 147–153. ACM Press (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Saariluoma, P.: Apperception, content-based psychology and design. In: Lindemann, U. (eds.) Human Behaviour in Design, pp. 72–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-07811-2_8

  45. Saariluoma, P., Cañas, J., Leikas, J.: Designing for Life: A Human Perspective on Technology Development. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2016)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  46. Schaathun, H.G.: Where Schön and Simon agree: the rationality of design. Des. Stud. 79, 101090 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Schoormans, J.P.L., Robben, H.S.J.: The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation. J. Econ. Psychol. 18, 271–387 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(97)00008-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Routledge,  Milton Park (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schön, D.A.: The reflective practioner. Ashgate Arena (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Silvennoinen, J.: Apperceiving visual elements in human-technology interaction design. Jyväskylä Stud. Comput. 261 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Silvennoinen, J. Jokinen, J.P.P.: Aesthetic appeal and visual usability in four icon design eras. In: Proceedings of the 2016 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4390–4400. ACM Press (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Silvennoinen, J., Jokinen, J.P.P.: Appraisals of salient visual elements in web page design. In: Advances in Human–Computer Interaction 2016 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Silvennoinen, J., Rousi, R., Jokinen, J.P.P., Perälä, P.: Apperception as a multisensory process in material experience. In: Proceedings of the Academic Mindtrek, pp. 144–151. ACM Press (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818187.2818285

  54. Simon, H.A.: The structure of ill structured problems. Artif. Intell. 4(3–4), 181–201 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. 3rd edn. Cambridge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Spence, C.: Crossmodal correspondences: a tutorial review. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 971–995 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Spence, C.: Senses of place: architectural design for the multisensory mind. Cognit. Res. Princ. Implic. 5(1), 1–26 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00243-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Stach, J.: A conceptual framework for the assessment of brand congruent sensory modalities. J. Brand Manag. 22(8), 673–694 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Stein, B.E. (ed.): The New Handbook of Multisensory Processing. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Stein, B.E., Meredith, M.A.: The Merging of the Senses. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Tversky, B.: What do sketches say about thinking. In: 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium, Sketch Understanding Workshop. Stanford University, AAAI Technical Report, SS-02-08, vol. 148, p. 151 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Veryzer, R., Hutchinson, W.: The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs. J. Consum. Res. 24(4), 374–394 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1086/209516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., Catty, S.: Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychol. Sci. 17(9), 799–806 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Information Technology, University of Jyvaskyla, 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Johanna Silvennoinen & Laura Mononen

Authors
  1. Johanna Silvennoinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Mononen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johanna Silvennoinen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Aaron Marcus and Associates, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Aaron Marcus

  2. World Usability Day and Bubble Mountain Consulting, Newton Center, MA, USA

    Elizabeth Rosenzweig

  3. Southern University of Science and Technology – SUSTech, Shenzhen, China

    Marcelo M. Soares

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Silvennoinen, J., Mononen, L. (2023). Multisensory MAYA – A Design Thinking Method to Enhance Predictability of Experience Design. In: Marcus, A., Rosenzweig, E., Soares, M.M. (eds) Design, User Experience, and Usability. HCII 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14030. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35699-5_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35699-5_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-35698-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-35699-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation