Advertisement

Tags vs. observers – a study on emotions tagged and emotions felt with Flickr pictures

  • Renata G. BianchiEmail author
  • Vânia P. A. Neris
  • Anderson L. Ara
Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

Designers can select media from user-generated tags in social networks to improve the design with the aim of evoking certain emotions. However, can they be relied on for that? Will users feel the same emotions as those that were linked to the media? This paper aims to support the decision-making of the designers, by exploring the observers’ emotions in pictures from social tags. An empirical online study was carried out with 410 volunteers who classified pictures from Flickr that were related to the five basic emotions plus “neutral” tag. The results suggest that there are differences between the tag and the emotion felt by this group of people for particular emotions. For instance, the findings suggest that the selection of pictures for disgust and anger needs additional criteria as well as collective indexing.

Keywords

Social tagging Pictures Emotions Design Empirical study 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Blake TM, Varnhagen CK, Parent MB (2001) Emotionally arousing pictures increase blood glucose levels and enhance recall. Neurobiol Learn Mem 75:262–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Booten K (2016) Hashtag Drift: Tracing the Evolving Uses of Political Hashtags Over Time. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2401–2405, ACMGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boulton M (2009) Designing for the Web. Penarth: Mark Boulton Design LtdGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradley MM, Lang PJ (1994) Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry 25:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dan-Glauser ES, Scherer KR (2011) The Geneva affective picture database (GAPED): a new 730-picture database focusing on valence and normative significance. Behav Res Methods 43:468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Lera E, Garreta-Domingo M (2007) Ten emotion heuristics: guidelines for assessing the user's affective dimension easily and cost-effectively. In: Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI... but not as we know it-Volume 2, pp. 163–166, British Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dellagiacoma M, Zontone P, Boato G, Albertazzi L (2011) Emotion based classification of natural images. In: Proceedings of the 2011 international workshop on DETecting and Exploiting Cultural diversiTy on the social web, pp. 17–22, ACMGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Desmet P, Dijkhuis E (2003) A wheelchair can be fun: a case of emotion-driven design. In: Proceedings of the 2003 international conference on Designing pleasurable products and interfaces, pp. 22–27, ACMGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ekman P (1992) An argument for basic emotions. Cognit Emot 6:169–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32:675–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gap for Casual Women's, Men's, Maternity, Baby & Kids Clothes. https://www.gap.com/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  12. 12.
    Garimella VRK, Alfayad A, Weber I (2016) Social Media Image Analysis for Public Health. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 5543–5547, ACMGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haidt J, McCauley C, Rozin P (1994) Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: a scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personal Individ Differ 16:701–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harmon-Jones E, Amodio DM, Zinner LR (2007) Social psychological methods of emotion elicitation. Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment, p.91Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harper ER, Rodden T, Rogers Y, Sellen A, Human B (2008) Human-Computer Interaction in the year 2020Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hastings SK, Iyer H, Neal D, Rorissa A, Yoon J (2007) Social computing, folksonomies, and image tagging: Reports from the research front. In: Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 44, pp.1–4Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian journal of statistics, pp.65–70Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jiang N, Feng X, Liu H, Liu J (2008) Emotional design of web page. In: Computer-Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design, 2008. CAID/CD 2008. 9th International Conference on, pp. 91–95, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jordan PW (1998) Human factors for pleasure in product use. Appl Ergon 29:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jörgensen C (2007) Image access, the semantic gap, and social tagging as a paradigm shiftGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kurdi B, Lozano S, Banaji MR (2016) Introducing the Open Affective Standardized Image Set (OASIS). Behavior research methods, pp. 1–14Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lakoff G (1987) Fire, women and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mindGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN (2008) International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical report A-8Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Layers Of Fear. https://www.layersoffear.com/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  25. 25.
    Lynch PJ, Horton S (2002) Web Style Guide: Basic Design Principles for Creating Web Sites, http://webstyleguide.com/wsg2/index.html
  26. 26.
    Machajdik J, Hanbury A (2010) Affective image classification using features inspired by psychology and art theory. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM international conference on Multimedia, pp. 83–92, ACMGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Montgomery DC (2013) Design and analysis of experiments. John wiley & sonsGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mori G, Paternò F, Furci F (2015) Design criteria for stimulating emotions in web applications. In: Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 165–182, Springer International PublishingGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Murphy FC, Hill EL, Ramponi C, Calder AJ, Barnard PJ (2010) Paying attention to emotional images with impact. Emotion 10(5):605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Neal D (2007) Folksonomies: introduction: folksonomies and image tagging: seeing the future? Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 34:7–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Norman D (2002) Emotion & design: attractive things work better. interactions 9:36–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Norman DA (2004) Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic booksGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ornager S (1995) The newspaper image database: empirical supported analysis of users' typology and word association clusters. In: Proceedings of the 18th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pp. 212–218, ACMGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Plutchik R (2001) The nature of emotions. Am Sci 89:344–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Porat T, Tractinsky N (2012) It's a pleasure buying here: the effects of web-store design on consumers' emotions and attitudes. Human–computer. Interaction 27:235–276Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Power M, Dalgleish T (2008) Cognition and emotion: From order to disorder. Psychology pressGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Realtor. https://www.realtor.com/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  38. 38.
    Rorissa A, Iyer H (2008) Theories of cognition and image categorization: what category labels reveal about basic level theory. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59:1383–1392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rosch E, Mervis CB, Gray WD, Johnson DM, Boyes-Braem P (1976) Basic objects in natural categories. Cogn Psychol 8:382–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Russel JA, Weiss A, Mendelsohn GA (1989) Affect grid: a single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. J Pers Soc Psychol 57:493–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Russell JA (1980) A Circumplex model of affect. J Pers Soc Psychol 39:1161–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Santaella L (2002) Applied Semiotics (in Portuguese). Cengage Learning EditorsGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Scherer KR (1984) On the nature and function of emotion: a component process approach. Approaches Emotion 2293:317Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Scherer KR (2005) What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Soc Sci Inf 44:695–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schmidt S, Stock WG (2009) Collective indexing of emotions in images. A study in emotional information retrieval. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60:863–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schupp HT, Cuthbert BN, Bradley MM, Cacioppo JT, Ito T, Lang PJ (2000) Affective picture processing: the late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance. Psychophysiology 37:257–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    City Sightseeing. https://city-sightseeing.com/en/home (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  48. 48.
    Silveira LM (2011) Introduction to color theory (in Portuguese). Ed. UTFPRGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Smith SL, Mosier JN (1986) Guidelines for designing user interface software. Bedford, MA: Mitre CorporationGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Spillers F (2004) Emotion as a cognitive artifact and the design implications for products that are perceived as pleasurable. Experience DynamicsGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Students Against Depression. https://www.studentsagainstdepression.org/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  52. 52.
    The Knot: Wedding Planner. https://www.theknot.com/wedding-planning (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  53. 53.
    TopDeck Travels. https://www.topdeck.travel/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  54. 54.
    Trulia: Real State Listings, Homes for Sale, Housing Data. https://www.trulia.com/ (2019). Accessed: 2019-01-08
  55. 55.
    Van Hoof JC, Van Buuringen M, El M'rabet I, de Gier M, Van Zalingen L (2014) Disgust-specific modulation of early attention processes. Acta Psychol 152:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUFSCarSão CarlosBrazil
  2. 2.Institute of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUSPSão CarlosBrazil

Personalised recommendations