Joyful Design

Possibility Driven Design

When searching for articles about joyful and positive design I came across the article “Towards Happiness: Possibility-Driven Design” by Pieter Desmet and Marc Hassenzahl. [1] Possibility-driven design acts as an alternative to the common problem-driven approach. Throughout their research, Desmet and Hassenzahl hope to lay ground for an approach to design, which draws upon happiness to motivate the design of future technologies.

“This will help establishing a culture of humane innovation, which understands technology as a possibility to improve life directly.”—Desmet & Hassenzahl.

From problems to possibilities [2]

Today, design techniques mostly favour a problem-driven approach, where design acts as an activity focused on removing problems (i.e., to make something easier, cleaner, cheaper, safer or smaller). The goal: to make the world a better place through solving its problems—instead of focusing on what makes us happy. Desmet describes problem-driven design as the mere attempt to “keep the demons asleep.” Which means, that problem-driven design primarily is about avoiding, solving, or neutralizing the negative, the moment it arises—removing prevailing problems. But, removing the negative must not necessarily generate a positive experience. It only guarantees the transition from a negative state to a neutral state. But, to generate a positive state from neutral may requires more than a problem-driven approach. For example, there is a difference between facilitating well-being indirectly through a more functional kitchen and the direct joy from a family gathering that takes place in that kitchen. Therefore, Desmet and Hassenzahl propose a possibility rather than problem-driven approach to design, to unlock its full potential of contributing to human flourishing.

They mentioned an example regarding leg prosthetics. “Instead of understanding the absence of legs as primarily a problem to be solved, the designers used a seemingly problematic situation as a possibility to explore material and technology to create a new type of leg. For a while, these legs where even considered better than natural one’s, which led to Pistorius being ruled ineligible for competitions, including the 2008 Summer Olympics – a decision reversed later.”— Desmet & Hassenzahl.

Although the FlexFoot successfully turned a problem into a possibility, it is still very much rooted in an anomaly—the absence of legs

That perfectly states, that a possibility driven design approach strives for more—the goal is to design products without referring to a problem, but still rooted in human practice and needs.

Another example from another industry—the game and entertainment industries—is Bandai’s Tamagotchi.

Tamagotchi—a little creature, which hatches from an egg when switching on the device for the first time. From then on, one must raise the Tamagotchi, feed it, play games with it, keep it healthy, clean it, punish and praise it. If left unattended, it will soon die.

The Tamagotchi was a cult in the mid 90ties of the last century, with an ongoing revival since 2004. The games concept inspired a range of games following the same basic principle, from Will Wright’s Sims published in 2000 to Sony’s recent EyePets. The Tamagotchi does not necessarily solve a problem, but appeals to the basic psychological need of relatedness and the associated interest in nurturing, care, and enjoyment created by taking on responsibility. Desmet & Hassenzahl compare it to the similarity of the enjoyment from having pets or from indulging in recreational gardening. Therefore, according to Desmet & Hassenzahl, a Tamagotchi is a possibility of fulfilling an everpresent need.

Even though, the Tamagotchi’s can be seen as a solution to the problem of “loneliness”. So, possibility driven design can also be seen as solving a problem on a more abstract level. However, Desmet & Hassenzahl disagree. “Relatedness, the need primarily addressed by the Tamagotchi, is sufficient and meaningful in itself. A technology that addresses relatedness will be, thus, meaningful, too. Now there are plenty of ways to satisfy relatedness, some more viable for certain people than others. As a result, people may prefer plants over pets or virtual pets over real ones. Or just have all the alternatives side by side. In other words, pets do not primarily solve a problem. It is just enjoyable to have them because they address important human needs […] TheTamagotchi is not a solution but a new way to craft technology to create a mean- ingful, fulfilling experience. Just for the sake of it.”—Desmet & Hassenzahl

There is an increasing interest in a possibility-driven approach to design, both with a focus on the pleasurable life and the good life. This interest is reflected in a broad focus on pleasure and enjoyment aka (positive) emotions as a design goal. All these new experimental design approaches primarily address humans, their experiences, joys and misfortunes and emphasize possibilities for new ways of happiness rather than the removal of problems.


[1] Desmet, Pieter / Hassenzahl, Marc: Towards Happiness. Possibility-Driven Design. Delft University of Technology 2012. URL:

[2] ebda.

Joyful Design

Experimental Phase

My last blogposts, to a big part, were about product attachment and symbolic meaning. Symbolic meaning turned out to be an important factor when it comes to designing meaningful and joyful design experiences, which can lead to product attachment and therefore prolonged product life cycles. In my first phase of experimentation I want to step away from theoretical research. The goal is to see if this theoretical knowledge reflects in “real cases” and to recognize further characteristics and/or differences in perception and classification of joyful design.

Goal: Find characteristics and/or differences in perception of a joyful object.

Method: Survey


In the first phase I want to hand out a questionnaire in a face-to-face interview, to a selected group of people. The questionnaire treats questions around perception of joy and emotions.

In the second phase the selected group of people will be asked to choose an object that is of most importance for them and one object that made them especially happy. In addition they will be asked why they choose the objects and which story and emotions they evoke.

Joyful Design

Speaking of an extended product life cycle through joyful design in my last blogposts, we come to another important aspect that can enhance a products life: designing for prolonged pleasure.

The research paper “Enjoying Joy: A Process-Based Approach to Design for Prolonged Pleasure” by Anna E. Pohlmeyer deals on how to sustain and optimize positive emotions derived from a positive experience.

It is a fact that initial emotions fade over time because people eventually adapt to changes. This phenomenon of reduced affective intensity is called hedonic adaptation. Hedonic adaption can lead people to constantly desire something new without reaching lasting satisfaction—which is a huge problem of our “throw-away-society”. 

Design for savoring
According to Pohlmeyer there is an approach of designing joyful experiences called “design for savoring”. Design for savoring is not only about providing pleasurable experiences, but it is also about optimizing these by appreciating the enjoyment. As a result, positive emotions of a given positive event can be increased in intensity and duration. Pohlmeyer also stated that savoring positive experiences can be understood as the counterpart of coping with negative experiences. However, design for savoring is less a matter of how experiences are designed, but rather of how a person deals with the resulting emotional experience. Savoring up-regulates positive emotions in order to extract an optimum level of positive emotions from an event and has been shown to counteract hedonic adaptation—the tendency of us mere humans to quickly return to a relatively stable level of happiness—and contribute to people’s well-being. Therefore, design for savoring, especially is a promising concept to consider in UX. [1]

Intensifying and Prolonging Positive Emotional Experiences through Design
Speaking of design for savoring, the question on what can be done to intensify positive emotional experiences raises. According to Nélies [2] there are four broad categories of savoring strategies:

a) behavioral display of positive emotions
b) focusing attention on the present moment
c) capitalizing, i.e. sharing with others,
d) positive mental time travel, i.e. vividly anticipating or remembering positive events.

These thoughts and behaviors have been shown to favorably affect the intensity and duration of positive feelings, which means that they can serve as valuable guides in design.

“Similarly, reliving an experience and the associated emotions in memory – be it a nostalgic recollection of the good old days or realizing what a loyal companion one’s laptop has been – reinforces pleasure efficiently and effectively. In this vein, it is also noteworthy to mention that positive emotional experiences can be enhanced not only in the moment but also in prospect and retrospect, e.g. by sharing with others. Hence, by looking into the underlying processes of experiencing pleasure, opportunities arise to proactively design for longer-term and enhanced positive experiences.” —Pohlmeyer

It is obvious that how we look at and interpret our world, hence, what we devote our attention to, affects our experiences and our well-being. When designing for joyful experiences it is therefore crucial to direct attention to the positive and to consider how positive emotions can be prolonged by increasing the intensity and duration of pleasure derived from positive experiences, rather than striving for a fast-paced consumption behavior of constant novelty seeking. [3]


[1] Nélis, D., Quoidbach, J., Hansenne, M., and Mikolajczak, M. Measuring individual differences in emotion regulation: The Emotion Regulation Profile- Revised (ERP-R). Psychologica Belgica, 51 (2011)49- 91.

[2] Pohlmeyer, Anna E.: Enjoying Joy. A Process-Based Approach to Design for Prolonged Pleasure. Helsinki. 2014

[3] ebda.

Joyful Design

Which qualities stimulate product attachment—what brings us to like/enjoy a product more than others?

Identity Based Human Behavior

Understanding ones own identity—who one is and what one believes—is a fundamental human drive. That fact points out that consumers like products, brands and consumption behaviors that are linked to self-association. That simply means for example that someone who sees oneself as an athlete will likely behave in ways that correspond to what it means to “be” an athlete. [1] That concept also is established in all forms of marketing and communication. An example from my previous research that uses this knowledge of the importance of self-association is the Branding Wheel of 12 Archetypes. [2] Another concept that includes that aspect in regards to design is the Positive Design Framework, which consists of three layers: design for pleasure design for virtue and design for personal significance. [3] Also, the aspect of self-association is deeply linked to objects with symbolic meaning, which is one of the most important characteristics when it comes to product attachment and happiness. [4]

“If a product symbolizes aspects of a person’s happiness, he/she is more likely to keep it, because losing the product implies that the strong symbolic meaning and thus the ‘happiness trigger’ is lost.” —Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton

At the time ones identity becomes central to self-conception, one starts to pay attention to many secondary associations to ones self-conception [5]. For example, individuals may integrate attitudinal and behavioral norms, emotion profiles [6], and a variety of other identity-linked concepts in memory [7]. All this together defines normative beliefs, attitudes, emotions and behaviors that define what one thinks, feels, and does. [8]

An interesting fact from the research paper “Identity-based consumer behavior” by Americus Reed, Stefano Puntoni, Mark Forehand and Luk Warlop is that language directly is linked to our perception of identity. Thus, depending on the language that we use, our identity/character changes. That is, because people do not have one identity*, but we indeed carry multiple layers of identity in us that can be triggered. One interesting finding was that English as a language often serves as a cue for a person’s cosmopolitan identity. That knowledge gets especially used in marketing, where products often get labeled in English language to consciously create an image of open-mindedness. [9]

The knowledge of importance of identity and self conception enables us to design relevant products for certain groups of individuals on a rough level. But let us take a deeper look to which identity-related information allows discrimination between options. Which means that, as mentioned in the beginning, an “athlete identity” helps to discriminate between a pair of Nike shoes and a pair of Crocs. But if we want to discriminate between a pair of Nikes or Adidas shoes it gets harder. According to the research paper “Identity-Based Consumer Behavior” there are five forms of relevance that influence these criteria and decision: object relevance, symbolic relevance, goal relevance, action relevance and evaluation relevance. [10]

1 Object relevance
Object relevance exists when an object is part of the symbolic constellation of products that define an identity. [11] [12] An example is a working mother that may be more favorable to an automobile that emphasizes safety and practicality. Object relevance is particularly common with brands that come to symbolize paricular user groups or “fit” with a particular identity.

2 Symbolic relevance
Symbolic relevance exists when the expression of a belief or the possession of an object communicates or reinforces one’s identity in the eyes of others. [13] That is because people likely judge about others based on their knowledge of other people’s purchase decisions. Therefore, products provide a “social stock of knowledge that people use in typifying those they meet”. [14] This general concept of symbolic congruence has been used to explain consumer attraction to products, brands and retail environments. [15] [16]

3 Goal relevance
Goal relevance exists when a potential belief or behavior is related to an issue or outcome that is important to the individual’s identity. These beliefs or behaviors could include the expression of an attitude, specific group-related behaviors, or simply affiliation with a product or brand.

4 action relevance
Action-relevant objects and behaviors allow the consumer to perform behavioral functions associated with a particular identity. For example, a “baseball player” may require a bat, glove and cleats to perform within that identity. [17]

5 evaluation relevance
Evaluation relevance refers to the extent to which the evaluative content of the identity has sufficient clarity and specificity to inform the consumer’s evaluation of the object (or brand). The goal is to guide a behavioral response. An example is an “urban teenager” who evaluates shoe brands, and finds several brands that have co-opted young, urban imagery in their advertising and are thus not differentiable on this identity dimension. In this situation, the absence of a clear identity-related norm provides her with an inadequate basis for choice [18], and thus her identity therefore fails to discriminate between the available options.

By working with those five layers, relevant, identity-based design can be derived. That can not only lead to a joyful design experience but furthermore can enhance product life cycles and therefore support efforts of a more sustainable relation to products.

The identity conflict principle
Any given identity is not possessed in isolation—each identity is one of many held identities that must be integrated into a person’s overall self-conception. Research on the interplay of multiple identities generally suggests that individuals seek to maintain harmony between their various identities. [19] [20] Finally, because people may hold multiple iden- tities, while each of the identities is not always consistent with all the others in its implications, identities may conflict. This in turn will moti- vate cognitive activity and behavior that aim to resolve such conflict (the conflict principle) either by active attempts to create a harmonized personal identity or by compartmentalizing identities into separable partitions of one’s life experience.

The identity-verification principle
Consumers will actively monitor the extent to which they stay true to their manifested identity. This “sought-after identity” operates similarly to an “ideal” self [21]. Higgins argued that as the perceived distance between a consumer’s actual and ideal selves increases, the consumer’s motivation to exert effort to reach the ideal also increases. People are motivated to behave consistently with their identities, which become the subject of goal striving and will drive corrective action or thought whenever the identity is at stake.

The relevance principle
Once an identity is adopted, the surrounding environment and the people and objects in it are evaluated for their relevance with respect to the identity, and a person will think, feel and behave consistently with the identity whenever it is deemed relevant in that situation.


[1] Reed, Americus / Puntoni, Stefano / Forehand, Mark / Warlop, Luk: International Journal of Research in Marketing. Identity-Based Consumer Behavior: 2012, S. 310—321

[2]  Medium. 12 Brand Archetypes You Can Use to Effectively Position Your Brand. URL:

[3] Delft Institute of Positive Design: Positive Design Reference Guide: 2015. URL:

[4] Mugge, R., Schoormans, J. P. L., & Schifferstein, H. N. J. (2008). Product attachment: Design strategies to stimulate the emotional bonding to products. In H. N. J. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 425-440). Amsterdam, the Netherland: Elsevier.

[5] Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 250–260.

[6] Verrochi-Coleman, N. M., & Williams, P. (2012). Feeling like myself: Emotion regulation and social identity. Working paper.

[7] Mercurio, K., & Forehand, M. (2011). An interpretive frame model of identity dependent learning: The moderating role of content–identity association. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 555–577.

[8] Reed, Americus / Puntoni, Stefano / Forehand, Mark / Warlop, Luk: International Journal of Research in Marketing. Identity-Based Consumer Behavior: 2012, S. 310—321

[9] ebda.

[10] ebda.

[11] Kleine, R. E., Kleine, S. S., & Kernan, J. B. (1993). Mundane consumption and the self: A social identity perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2, 209–235.

[12] Reed, A., II (2004). Activating the self-importance of consumer selves: Exploring identity salience effects on judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 286–295.

[13] Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139–168.

[14] Shavitt, S., & Nelson, M. R. (2000). The social-identity function in person perception: Communicated meanings of product preferences. In G. Maio, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes (pp. 37–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

[15] Malhotra, N. K. (1988). Self-concept and product choice: An integrated perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9, 1–28.

[16] Sirgy, J. M., Grewal, D., & Mangleburg, T. (2000). Retail environment, self-congruity, and retail patronage: An integrative model and a research agenda. Journal of Busi- ness Research, 49, 127–138.

[17] Kleine, R. E., Kleine, S. S., & Kernan, J. B. (1993). Mundane consumption and the self: A social identity perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2, 209–235.

[18] Kallgren, C. A., Reno, R. R., & Cialdini, R. B. (2000). A focus theory of normative conduct: When norms do and do not affect behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1002–1012.

[19] Amiot, C. E., de la Sablonnière, R., Terry, D. J., & Smith, J. R. (2007). Integration of social identities in the self: Toward a cognitive-developmental model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 364–388.

[20] Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 88–106.

[21] Higgins, E. T. (1986). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.

Joyful Design

Symbolic Meaning

As mentioned in my last blog post, symbolic meaning acts as one of the most important attributes of product attachment and can be considered as an important factor for positive design. For a better understanding I wanted to do further research on the term of symbolic meaning, outlined in the following text.

Symbolic meaning refers to the image and the associations that spring to mind in regard to a specific object/product. Objects can then act as symbols, providing personal meaning as well as communicating (the owner’s) personal characteristics to others. Those meaning that we attach to objects directly influence how we feel about objects and how we assess them. Researches developed various terms to describe this phenomenon of symbolic meaning, including meaning [1], personal meaning [2], symbolic meaning [3], product meaning [4], linking value [5] and symbolic qualities associated with products. [6]

Symbolic Meaning and User Experience

However, symbolic meaning has many dimensions and another concept strongly related with symbolic meaning is the user experience—user experience refers to the user’s perceptions and responses in regard to their interaction with a system or product (ISO 9241-110, 2010). That comes, because symbolic meanings and associations—dependent on personal interpretation—with a product seem to be an integral part of how users experience a product. Therefore the practice of user experience design has evolved to take into account more experiential aspects of user-product interaction, such as emotions, feelings and meanings. Nowadays many researchers agree that symbolic meaning acts as an important dimension of user experience.[7] Desmet and Heckert identify three levels of product experience [8]:

1) aesthetic pleasure
2) attribution of meaning
happens through cognitive processes such as interpretation, memory retrieval and associations
3) emotional response

Desmet and Heckert state that meaning is related to the personal or symbolic significance of products or the possibility of assigning them personality or other expressive. As an example they mention a Chinese teacup that one of the authors is attached to because it represents his visit to China.

Hassenzahl on the other hand does not explicitly mention symbolic meaning as a component of user experience, but he describes aspects that are closely related. He categorizes the hedonic aspect of user experience as including [9]:
1) stimulation—personal growth, an increase or knowledge and skills
2) identification—self-expression, interaction with relevant others
3) evocation—self-maintenance, memories

Especially identification as well as other hedonic aspects can be seen as part of symbolic meanings.

Symbolic Meaning and Appearance

Symbolic meaning can also be related to a product’s form, appearance and use—that is especially the case in literature linked to Industrial Design. Product semantics there get related to a concern for the cognitive meanings, symbolic functions and cultural histories of form. [10]

Van Rompay gives an overview of studies regarding the relationships between a product’s formal features and symbolic meaning. In his example the rounded form of an object is generally perceived as being secure or emotional. Van Rompay’s conclusion is that meaning is not a fixed property of the world or mind, but results from interactions between individual and environment. One of his studies shows that forms connote different symbolic meanings across cultures. [11]

Symbolic Meaning / Product Meaning and Product Attachment

Product attachment gets best represented by products that have some profound and sustained meaning for users [12]. Already in 1923, Ogden and Richards defined product meaning as the relationship between mind, object and world. Product meaning is generally seen as subjective, suffused with affectivity and usually either utilitarian or symbolic. It has also been stated that a group of individuals have a tendency to make similar inferences about a product, suggesting that symbolic meaning is culturally shared. Symbols are formed by cultural principles, which can be:
— norms
— values
— social categories

Sari Kujala states as example the American flag—the flag may symbolizes freedom or conservative American. [13]

In psychological and sociological literature it gets stated that individuals pay attention to object symbolism mainly because they want to express, maintain or enhance their self-concept—their identity and ideal image of themself. Sociological literature also gives examples of how symbolic meaning has been used to compensate for low self-esteem. [14] Zimmerman adds to sychological and sociological literature that people use products as self-extension—those product then act as an essential part of identity construction for a development of a coherent life story. [15] Mugge adds that people tend to develop a stronger attachment to products where they use them to express and maintain a unique personal identity. [16] In addition to identity, Allen shows by his survey studies that to some extent users form product preferences by evaluating whether their values are represented in product meanings. [17]

Symbolic Meaning and Postmodernity

In ethnosociology a new concept of thinking characterizing postmodernity constituted. Cova states that to satisfy their desire for community, modern individuals seek products and services less for their use value than for their linking value. Linking value results when a product facilitates and supports communion by providing a site, an emblem, the support for integration or recognition, and so forth. Cova states that “the postmodern individual can build an identity for themself with cultural symbols and all possible references (such as plays, exhibitions, films, and books, etc.). Linking value refers to product properties that cause users to experience a feeling of communion.[18] The same idea is presented in the consumer research literature. For example, Belk argues that identity is important not only on an individual level, but also on a collective level involving family group, subcultural and national identities. [19]

“[…] the literature of industrial design suggests that symbolic meaning can arise through memory retrieval and associations (Desmet & Hekkert, 2007) and seems to be one of the determinants of product attachment (Mugge et al., 2008; Schifferstein & Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, 2008). Consumer behavior research shows that symbolic meaning is important to users mainly because they want to maintain, enhance and express their identity and ideal image of themselves. It has been shown that symbolic meaning arises when products support user values (Allen, 2006). The sociological literature suggests that the goal can also be a feeling of communion (Cova, 1997).” —Kujala, S. / Nurkka, P.

Considering all the different definitions and fields of research there are various views of the concept of symbolic meaning. Symbolic meaning—one of the most important attributes of product attachment, especially happiness related symbolic meaning—is something intangible and subjective, but also culturally shared.

Summary of the identified factors of symbolic meaning and the relationship of symbolic meaning to product experience as presented by Desmet and Hekkert (2007). The identified factors overlap, but they describe the nature of phenomenon. [20]


[1] Crilly, N., Good, D., Matravers, D., & Clarkson, P. J. (2008). Design as communication: Exploring the validity and utility of relating intention to interpretation. Design Studies, 29(5), 425-457.

[2] Cupchik, G. C., & Hilscher, M. C. (2008). Holistic perspectives on the design of experience. In H. N. J. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 241-256). Amsterdam, the Netherland: Elsevier.

[3] Desmet, P., & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework for product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57-66.

[4] Allen, M. W. (2002). Human values and product symbolism: Do consumers form product preference by comparing the human values symbolized by a product to the human values that they endorse? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(12), 2475-2501

[5] Cova, B. (1997). Community and consumption, towards a definition of the “linking value” of product or services. European Journal of Marketing,31(3/4), 297-316.

[6] Kujala, S. / Nurkka, P. (2012). Sentence Completion for Evaluating Symbolic Meanin. URL:

[7] ebda.

[8] Desmet, P., & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework for product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57-66.

[9] Hassenzahl, M. (2003). The thing and I: Understanding therelationship between user and product. In M. Blythe, C. Overbeeke, A. F. Monk, & P. C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From usability to enjoyment (pp. 31-42). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.

[10] Kujala, S. / Nurkka, P. (2012). Sentence Completion for Evaluating Symbolic Meanin. URL:

[11] van Rompay, T. J. L. (2008). Product expression: Bridging the gap between the symbolic and the concrete. In H. N. J. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 333-351). Amsterdam, the Netherland: Elsevier.

[12] Mugge, R., Schoormans, J. P. L., & Schifferstein, H. N. J. (2008). Product attachment: Design strategies to stimulate the emotional bonding to products. In H. N. J. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 425-440). Amsterdam, the Netherland: Elsevier.

[13] Kujala, S. / Nurkka, P. (2012). Sentence Completion for Evaluating Symbolic Meanin. URL:

[14] Allen, M. W. (2002). Human values and product symbolism: Do consumers form product preference by comparing the human values symbolized by a product to the human values that they endorse? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(12), 2475-2501.

[15] Zimmerman, J. (2009). Designing for the self: Making products that help people become the person they desire to be. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 395-404). New York, NY: ACM.

[16] Mugge, R., Schoormans, J. P. L., & Schifferstein, H. N. J. (2008). Product attachment: Design strategies to stimulate the emotional bonding to products. In H. N. J. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 425-440). Amsterdam, the Netherland: Elsevier.

[17] Allen, M. W. (2002). Human values and product symbolism: Do consumers form product preference by comparing the human values symbolized by a product to the human values that they endorse? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(12), 2475-2501

[18] Cova, B. (1997). Community and consumption, towards a definition of the “linking value” of product or services. European Journal of Marketing,31(3/4), 297-316.

[19] Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168.

[20] Kujala, S. / Nurkka, P. (2012). Sentence Completion for Evaluating Symbolic Meanin. URL: