A Framework to Evaluate Areas of Interest for Sustainable Products and Designs

Abstract

Experience and evaluation research on sustainable products’ design is increasingly supported by eye-tracking tools. In particular, many studies have investigated the effect of gazing at or fixating on Areas of Interest on products’ evaluations, and in a number of cases, they have inferred the critical graphical elements leading to the preference of sustainable products. This paper is motivated by the lack of generalizability of the results of these studies, which have predominantly targeted specific products and Areas of Interest. In addition, it has also been overlooked that the observation of some Areas of Interest, despite not specifically targeting sustainable aspects, can lead consumers to prefer or appreciate sustainable products in any case. Furthermore, it has to be noted that sustainable products can be recognized based on their design (shape, material, lack of waste generated) and/or, more diffusedly, information clearly delivered on packaging and in advertising. With reference to the latter, this paper collected and classified Areas of Interest dealt with in past studies, markedly in eco-design and green consumption, and characterized by their potential generalizability. Specifically, the identified classes of Areas of Interest are not peculiar to specific products or economic sectors. These classes were further distinguished into “Content”, i.e., the quality aspect they intend to highlight, and “Form”, i.e., the graphical element used as a form of communication. This framework of Areas of Interest is the major contribution of the paper. Such a framework is needed to study regularities across multiple product categories in terms of how the observation of Areas of Interest leads to product appreciation and value perception. In addition, the potential significant differences between sustainable and commonplace products can be better investigated.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.