Title Page
ABSTRACT
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION 16
1.1. What is Everyday Design? 17
1.2. Recycling, upcycling and Everyday Design 19
1.3. Behaviour change 20
1.4. Aim of the research 21
1.5. Research methods 22
1.6. Thesis outline 22
References 24
2. Understanding Everyday Design: A Case Study 28
2.1. Introduction 28
2.1.1. The Conceptual framework of everyday design 30
2.1.2. ED product characteristics 31
2.2. Method 36
2.2.1. Case study 36
2.2.2. Data collection 36
2.2.3. Data analysis 37
2.3. Results 37
2.3.1. Variety of everyday Design 37
2.3.2. Product elements as ED triggers 39
2.3.3. Relationship between product elements and ED functions 41
2.3.4. Levels of appropriation and ED physical distance effect 42
2.4. Discussion and conclusions 44
References 46
Appendix 49
Appendix 1. [제목없음] 49
3. Understanding Everyday Design Behaviour: An Exploratory Experiment 52
3.1. Introduction 52
3.1.1. Product elements 55
3.1.2. Affordance and everyday design 57
3.1.3. Context 57
3.2. Method 58
3.2.1. Participants 58
3.2.2. Instruments 59
3.2.3. Procedure 61
3.2.4. Data analysis 62
3.3. Results 63
3.3.1. ED product categories 64
3.3.2. Product elements and affordances 64
3.3.3. Psychological triggers and affordances 71
3.3.4. Appropriation and proximity 74
3.3.5. Transformation and temporality of function 75
3.3.6. Satisfaction 76
3.4. Discussion 77
References 79
Appendix 83
Appendix 2. [제목없음] 83
4. The Influence of User Characteristics, Product Characteristics and Context in Everyday Design Behaviour 84
4.1. Introduction 84
4.1.1. User characteristics 88
4.1.2. Context 88
4.1.3. Product characteristics 90
4.1.4. Characteristics of everyday design 91
4.2. Method 92
4.2.1. Participants 92
4.2.2. Products and materials 93
4.2.3. Procedure 93
4.2.4. Data analysis 96
4.3. Results 97
4.3.1. User characteristics 97
4.3.2. ED context 100
4.3.3. Product characteristics and ED 104
4.3.4. Influence of user, product and context on everyday design 108
4.3.5. Characteristics of ED products 109
4.4. Discussion and conclusions 110
4.4.1. Why do people engage in ED? 111
4.4.2. Which factors influence everyday design? 111
4.4.3. Implications for designers 115
4.4.4. Future research 116
References 117
Appendix 121
Appendix 3. Pictures of the 100 cases brought in by participants 121
Appendix 4. Instruction of the user study 122
Appendix 5. Multinomial logistic regression results 123
5. Discussion and Conclusion 124
5.1. Introduction 124
5.2. Why everyday design? 125
5.3. User characteristics 126
5.4. Context and Situation 127
5.5. Product 127
5.6. Designers' role 131
5.6.1. Users' motives and abilities 131
5.6.2. Context and situation 132
5.6.3. Product elements and affordances 133
5.7. Limitation 133
5.8. Future research 134
References 135
Appendix 136
Appendix 6. Examples of common ED products as well as difference due to culture 136
REFERENCE 137
Table 1. Detailed elements of form, material and manipulability that were used for ED triggers 41
Table 2. Frequency of physical product elements mentioned as trigger 65
Table 3. ED affordances of each product. The colour of the chart is white when there is no case,... 66
Table 4. Frequency of affordances with psychological triggers 72
Table 5. Four age groups of participants 93
Table 6. Participants' demographic data and technical skill: A to D are age groups (see Table 5) 98
Table 7. Creativity scores averaged for age groups, separated by gender 99
Table 8. Reasons for ED and examples 101
Table 9. Original product categories and their frequencies on the rows and their transformation to... 105
Table 10. Detailed aspects of form, material and manipulability that were triggers of ED 106
Table 11. Affordances mentioned by participants about their ED product 107
Table 12. Most frequent product elements as triggers for ED 129
Table 13. Perceived affordances in Studies 2 and 3 130
Figure 1. ED cases found in daily life: Orange as a mask (left), Pen as book marker (middle), Paint... 18
Figure 2. Adaptation of the 'End-of-life-options' figure by Shu & Flowers (1995) 19
Figure 3. Behavioural intervention strategies 21
Figure 4. Visualization of the thesis outline 23
Figure 5. Examples of transforming the primary function of an existing product to another function:... 29
Figure 6. The conceptual framework of ED used in the study. 31
Figure 7. Variables used in the study for understanding everyday design. 32
Figure 8. Examples of product elements used as trigger: (a) Shape of dustpan including handle as... 33
Figure 9. Examples of level of appropriation: (a) The disposable coffee cup lid was used as a dish.... 33
Figure 10. Examples of ED physical distance. From left to right: (a) The colander used when... 34
Figure 11. Examples of ED function change or addition: From left to right: (a) Function change:... 35
Figure 12. Examples of temporary vs. permanent use of ED: (a) Using the weight of dumb-bells as... 35
Figure 13. Examples of the ED cases: (a) a disposable cup used as a cover; (b) napkin used as a... 36
Figure 14. Percentage of product categories: Categories of original products (left) and ED... 38
Figure 15. Frequency of ED cases and examples in terms of temporality of function: (a) A chair as... 39
Figure 16. Frequency of ED cases and examples of product elements as ED triggers.: (a) An egg... 40
Figure 17. Frequency and examples of relationship between product elements and ED functions:... 42
Figure 18. Relationship between ED functions and product elements through level of appropriation... 44
Figure 19. A conceptual framework of the study regarding everyday design behaviour 54
Figure 20. Perceived affordances and perceptual triggers for ED 61
Figure 21. The process of the experiment conducted in the study. 62
Figure 22. An example of participants' ED production and use process 63
Figure 23. Percentage of ED product categories and examples: From left, the examples are... 64
Figure 24. Examples of using hidden affordance. 66
Figure 25. Relationship between the affordance and product elements of the dustpan with... 68
Figure 26. Relationship between the affordance and product elements of the umbrella with... 69
Figure 27. Relationship between the affordance and product elements of the plastic bottle with... 70
Figure 28. Relationship between the affordance and product elements of the foil plate with... 71
Figure 29. Examples of semantic triggers using the meaning of the original product elements:... 72
Figure 30. The semantic trigger connected stand-ability and trapezium of dustpan: participant's... 73
Figure 31. Examples of cultural triggers: based on the experience of reuse, participants made a... 73
Figure 32. Examples of logical triggers: based on the participants' knowledge, a reflector for cell... 74
Figure 33. Percentages of level of appropriation and ED physical distance 75
Figure 34. Frequency of ED cases in terms of the temporality and transformation of function 76
Figure 35. Participants' satisfaction with making and using ED products based on the four original products 77
Figure 36. The conceptual framework of everyday design 87
Figure 37. Examples of creativity rating scales: a paper cup idea (left) and a paperclip idea (right) 95
Figure 38. Examples of creativity experiment results 99
Figure 39. How the participants obtained the original product 102
Figure 40. Two approaches to ED: need-driven (left) and inspiration-driven (right) 103
Figure 41. Physical distance between the place of the original product and that of the ED product 103
Figure 42. Examples of emotional distance and ED 104
Figure 43. Multinomial logistic regression: effects of user, product and context characteristics on... 108
Figure 44. Percentages of ED cases in terms of the longevity and transformation of function 110
Figure 45. Level of appropriation in percentages 110
Figure 46. Examples of need-driven ED solutions with close-distance products, reused without appropriation 113
Figure 47. Examples of hidden (left) and situational (right) affordance 114