應用MBTI性格量表探討消費者對不同比例矩形之偏好 / Application of the MBTI personality scale to investigate consumers’ preferences for different ratios of rectangles

王靜儀 Wang Ching-yi
2015-09-23
Abstract:黃金比例是否為普遍偏好的比例,至今仍備受爭議。本研究主要目的以心理測驗所發展出可歸納不同類型性格的MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator),來調查性格及教育背景是否會影響比例的偏好。本實驗分為兩階段進行。第一階段,本研究總共調查406位受試者,其中,有324位(設計師128位和一般人196位)擁有單一性格的人,再作進一步探討。第二階段,有十五種矩形比例(包括水平和垂直樣本)作測試。要求受試者以5點量表評估每種矩形的喜好。其研究結果,分別顯示:(1)比例的喜好程度可分成三個趨向:大多數人最喜歡的比例為正方形,黃金比例喜歡的程度為普通,超過黃金比例之後的比例漸漸趨向於不喜歡;(2)性格及教育背景皆會影響喜好的比例;(3)理性性格的人偏向較喜歡方正的比例,而感性性格的人則較能接受極端比例。其結果有助於未來在進行市場定位及產品外型設計之參考。 Whether the golden ratio is the favorite ratio for people remains a controversial research issue until now. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the personality factor affects people’s ratio preference, by classifying people into different personality types based on the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) test from developmental psychology. There were two steps in this process. In the first step, a total of 406 subjects were surveyed in this study. Among them, 324 subjects (128 designers and 196 novices) with single-type personality were used as subjects for a further survey. In step 2, 15 rectangle ratios were tested, including horizontal and vertical samples. Subjects were asked to evaluate their preferences for each rectangle by using a Likert 1 to 5 score. The results of the study are summarized as follows: (1) The tendency of preference for varied ratios can be divided into three classes: for people who tend to like the ratio of a square, the preference for a golden ratio is fair, and when the ratio increases to exceed the golden ratio, it will be gradually disliked; (2) Both personality and educational background can affect the ratio preference ; (3) ‘Thinking’ type of people are more likely to prefer the nearly ‘square’ rectangle, while the Feeling type people are more able to accept the extreme proportions of rectangles. This result could be used as guidelines for product design and market position setting.
Psychology,Business
What problem does this paper attempt to address?