Article | KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13 | Exploring the Cognitive Structure of Aircraft Passengers’ Emotions in Relation to Their Comfort Experience Link�ping University Electronic Press Conference Proceedings
Göm menyn

Title:
Exploring the Cognitive Structure of Aircraft Passengers’ Emotions in Relation to Their Comfort Experience
Author:
Naseem Ahmadpour: Department of Mathematics and Idustrial Engineering, Polytechnique Montråal, Canada Jean-Marc Robert: Department of Mathematics and Idustrial Engineering, Polytechnique Montråal, Canada Gitte Lindgaard: Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia / Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Download:
Full text (pdf)
Year:
2014
Conference:
KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13
Issue:
100
Article no.:
030
Pages:
387-394
No. of pages:
8
Publication type:
Abstract and Fulltext
Published:
2014-06-11
ISBN:
978-91-7519-276-5
Series:
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings
ISSN (print):
1650-3686
ISSN (online):
1650-3740
Publisher:
Linköping University Electronic Press; Linköpings universitet


Export in BibTex, RIS or text

Emotion descriptions were elicited from participants’ written accounts of their comfort experience and grouped according to the emotion model by Ortony; Clore; and Collins (OCC). The cognitive structure and specific appraisal patterns of passengers were explored on three levels of passenger’s concerns (goals; standards; and aspects); their focus during the flight (including the mediating cabin elements) and the resulting emotions. Four emotion groups were highlighted as relevant to flight comfort. Wellbeing (e.g.; joy; distress) emotions were the most frequently mentioned group by participants when focused on the consequences of interaction with cabin features such as seat; IFE and service; pertaining to participants’ personal goals (e.g.; security; calmness). The cognitive underpinning of prospect-based (e.g.; satisfied) emotions included similar goals except that participants evaluated the consequences of their interaction with the seat; legroom; IFE and service relevant to their expectations and anticipations. The emotions in wellbeing/attribution compound group were elicited upon evaluating the consequences of the actions of agents (e.g.; service; neighbors). Thus emotions anger and gratitude emerged when those actions yielded pleasing or unpleasing consequences for participants. Attraction (e.g.; liking) emotions were generated once passengers developed liking or disliking for certain aspects (e.g.; aesthetics; physical fitting) of the seat and legroom. Subsequently; a model of cognitive structure of passengers’ emotions was constructed for the flight context highlighting the seat and services as the central (most frequently regarded) features to passengers’ emotional experiences. The proposed model enables designers to recognize the types of experiences that should be delivered to ensure that passengers feel comfortable.

Keywords: Comfort; Emotion; Experience; Aircraft; Passenger

KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13

Author:
Naseem Ahmadpour, Jean-Marc Robert, Gitte Lindgaard
Title:
Exploring the Cognitive Structure of Aircraft Passengers’ Emotions in Relation to Their Comfort Experience
References:

Ahmadpour; N.; Lindgaard; G.; Robert; J.M.; Pownall; B. (2014). The thematic structure of passenger comfort experience and its relationship to the context features in the aircraft cabin. Ergonomics (2014).

Clore; G. L.; Schwarz; N.; Conway; M. (1994). Affective causes and consequences of social information processing. In R. S. Wyer; & T. K. Srull (Eds.); Handbook of social cognition (2nd ed.; Vol. 1; pp. 323-418). Hillsdale; NJ: Erlbaum.

De Looze; M.P.; Kuijt-Evers; L.F.M.; Van Dieen; J. (2003). Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics; 46 (10); 985-997.

Desmet; P.M.A.; Porcelijn; R.; van Dijk; M.B. (2005). How to design WOW? Introducing a layered-emotional approach. In: S. Wensveen (Ed.); Proceedings of The International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces (pp. 71-89); Eindhoven; Netherlands.

Desmet; E.; Bernard; Y.; Boy; G. (2004). Designing for Comfort. In: D. Ward; K.A. Brookhuis; C.M. Weikert; Eds. Human Factors in Design; Maastricht; Netherlands: Shaker Publishing; 111-127.

Dumur; E.; Bernard; Y.; Boy; G. (2004). Designing for Comfort. In: D. Ward; K.A. Brookhuis; C.M. Weikert; Eds. Human Factors in Design; Maastricht; Netherlands: Shaker Publishing; 111-127.

Frijda; N.H. (1988). The Laws of Emotion. American Psychologist; 43; 349-358.

Helander; M. G. (2003). Forget about ergonomics in chair design? Focus on aesthetics and comfort. Ergonomics; 46 (13-14); 1306-1319.

Kuijt-Evers; L. F. M.; Groenesteijn; L.; De Looze; M. P.; Vink; P. (2004). Identifying factors of comfort in using handtools. Applied Ergonomics; 35; 453-458.

Ortony; A.; Clore; G.; Foss; M. (1987). The referential structure of the affective lexicon. Cognitive Science; 11; 341-364.

Ortony; A.; Clore; G.; Collins; A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge; UK: Cambridge University Press.

Scherer; K.R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information; 44; 695-729.

KEER2014. Proceedings of the 5th Kanesi Engineering and Emotion Research; International Conference; Linköping; Sweden; June 11-13

Author:
Naseem Ahmadpour, Jean-Marc Robert, Gitte Lindgaard
Title:
Exploring the Cognitive Structure of Aircraft Passengers’ Emotions in Relation to Their Comfort Experience
Note: the following are taken directly from CrossRef
Citations:
No citations available at the moment


Responsible for this page: Peter Berkesand
Last updated: 2018-9-11