Integrating user perceptions of socio-emotional aspects in wheelchair design: A pilot study using Kansei Engineering
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Comfort in wheelchair use is influenced not only by ergonomic factors but also by socio-emotional aspects that shape the user's experience. This study aims to explore how socio-emotional factors can be integrated into the representational aspects of wheelchairs. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 37 wheelchair users using Kansei Engineering methods. Participants provided data on semantic and product spaces through a questionnaire covering demographics, aesthetic importance, symbolic importance, and social communication challenges. They also rated four distinct wheelchairs using Kansei words (KWs). Then, Quality Function Deployment (QFD) linked users' insights to specific wheelchair properties. Aesthetic (76%) and Symbolic (56%) importance, as well as age, were significantly associated with social communication challenges (57%) (p < 0.05). Age was significantly associated with both Aesthetic and Symbolic importance, while gender was only linked to Aesthetic importance (p < 0.05). Descriptive analysis indicated that advanced manual and powered wheelchair designs scored higher than conventional ones. Accordingly, three key components were identified for both categories, with the highest loadings of KW in each. QFD results prioritized adjustable frame design, with 8.61% for manual and 10.44% for powered models, as key to enhancing socio-emotional aspects. Beyond analyzing the dynamics of aesthetics, symbolism, and social challenges, this study uncovers users' perceptions of wheelchair design characteristics. It proposes principal components to guide designers and includes computational analysis to connect these insights with wheelchair properties, aspects often overlooked in assistive device literature. However, redesign effectiveness also hinges on understanding social factors like stereotypes, and wheelchair-related metaphors. • The aesthetic and symbolic meaning of wheelchairs, along with age, is significantly related to experiences of social communication challenges. • While age is a significant factor associated with perceptions of the aesthetic and symbolic importance of wheelchairs, gender is only linked to aesthetic importance. • The socio-emotional design of advanced wheelchairs is guided by three key components with the highest KW loadings. For AMW, these include: 1) Secure Navigation with Advanced Representation, 2) Manoeuvrability with Pleasant Social Representation, and 3) Reliability and Respectful Social Interaction. For APW, the components are: 1) Self-Reliance and Pleasant Social Representation, 2) Self-Confidence with Social Respect, and Flexibility in Mobility. 3) Together, these factors encourage designs that enhance the social and emotional polish of advanced wheelchairs. • The QFD model identifies optimizing adjustable frame design as the top priority for enhancing socio-emotional aspects in both manual and powered wheelchairs. • KE identifies essential steps for wheelchairs to meet WUs' socio-emotional needs, while redesign must also address societal perceptions and stereotypes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».