Beautiful Objects as an Extension of the Self: A Reply

In their comments, Frohlich (this issue), Monk (this issue), Tractinsky (thisissue), Overbeeke and Wensveen (this issue) addressed a wide variety of in-teresting issues relevant to the study of beauty. The methodological aspectsare especially valuable. Besides the regular debate of what constitutes goodresearch,theyrevealmanyunresolvedhigher-levelconceptualdiscrepancies.To resolve those and to find a shared understanding of what beauty is andhow to study it is the key to guaranteeing the impact of our research in thefield of human–computer interaction (HCI). Only if studies can be comparedand integrated into a common model ,or even theory, others will begin tobenefit.The present reply is selective. I address the following six loosely con-nected, conceptual aspects, which I consider important.• Beauty as an experience versus beauty as a judgment.• Beauty in objects as a desired extension of the self.• Does visceral beauty exist?• Beauty as a neither less nor more elusive judgment than usability,utility, or satisfaction.• Shall we focus on objects or on individuals?• Any lessons for design?I am aware of the many other issues, large and small, raised but not ad-dressed by the reply. They are not lost. There will be many future opportuni-ties to further research and discuss them.

[1]  Klaus R. Scherer,et al.  Introduction: Cognitive components of emotion. , 2003 .

[2]  Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals ( VDTs ) — Part 11 : Guidance on usability , 1998 .

[3]  N. Tractinsky,et al.  What is beautiful is usable , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[4]  Joseph E LeDoux.  Emotion, memory and the brain. , 1994, Scientific American.

[5]  Stephan Wensveen,et al.  Beauty in Use , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Andrew Ortony,et al.  The Cognitive Structure of Emotions , 1988 .

[7]  Noam Tractinsky,et al.  A Few Notes on the Study of Beauty in HCI , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[8]  David M. Frohlich,et al.  Beauty as a Design Prize , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  From mental effort to perceived usability: transforming experiences into summary assessments , 2004, CHI EA '04.

[11]  Gitte Lindgaard,et al.  What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? , 2003, Interact. Comput..

[12]  R. Zajonc.  Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[13]  P. Fishwick.  Exploring Attributes of Skins as Potential Antecedents of Emotion in Hci , 2006 .

[14]  Robert J. Logan,et al.  Design of Simplified Television Remote Controls: A Case for Behavioral and Emotional Usability , 1994, CHI 1994.

[15]  Peter M. Gollwitzer,et al.  Symbolic self-completion , 1982 .

[16]  E. Wertheim,et al.  Depression, guilt, and self-management of pleasant and unpleasant events. , 1983, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  James K. Beggan.  On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. , 1992 .

[18]  E. Berscheid,et al.  What is beautiful is good. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  R. Belk.  Possessions and the Extended Self , 1988 .

[20]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Summary assessment of experiences: The whole is different from the sum of its parts. , 2003 .

[21]  Brendan Walker,et al.  Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty , 2004, INTR.

[22]  Leaf Van Boven,et al.  To do or to have? That is the question. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[23]  D. Norman.  Emotional design : why we love (or hate) everyday things , 2004 .

[24]  Caroline Hummels,et al.  Beauty in usability : forget about ease of use! , 2002 .

[25]  Peter C. Wright,et al.  Making Sense of Experience , 2005, Funology.

[26]  D. J. Schneider,et al.  Implicit personality theory: A review. , 1973 .

[27]  Marc Hassenzahl.  Character grid : a simple repertory grid technique for web site analysis and evaluation , 2003 .

[28]  Andrew F. Monk,et al.  The Product as a Fixed-Effect Fallacy , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  A. Eagly,et al.  What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. , 1991 .

[30]  G. Clore,et al.  Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. , 1983 .

[31]  Andrew Ortony,et al.  Affect and Proto-Affect in Effective Functioning , 2005, Who Needs Emotions?.