Skip to main content
Journal of Wood Science

Official Journal of the Japan Wood Research Society

Download PDF
  • Original Article
  • Published:

Looking at computer-visualized interior wood: A qualitative assessment using focus groups

Journal of Wood Science volume 55, pages 113–120 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

The objective of this study was to explore and gather human reactions and perceptions on computer visualizations of interior wood. The subjective qualities of such products are important because they infl uence the most critical of consumer decisions: to buy or not. To learn more about a phenomenon than quantitative data can provide, qualitative methods are needed. Here, grounded theory was used with focus groups to form a map of 14 people’s experiences of wood. Six computer-generated pictures with visible wood were varied into 18 pictures, such that two-by-two comparison resulted in 3500 words. These were combined into a map that was generated earlier, which had found 2000 words. The main dimensions found were light, color, unity, and authenticity. Light is more than brightness; shadows and lighting seemed more important for the wood feeling, and color and contrast gave life and warmth to the material on the screen. Respondents wanted wood that was more “woody” and “warmer” than wood actually is, that is, a hyper-realistic picture. Perhaps smart modification rather than photorealism should be the goal. Distribution of the earlier found activity and harmony was important for most respondents. In addition, many subjects discussed the composition and/or the context or purpose of the pictures. The impact of wood is not just related to the wood itself; it is also intertwined with its surroundings.

References

  1. Pakarinen T (1999) Success factors of wood as a furniture material. Forest Prod J 49:79–85

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wiklund M (1992) A profitable wood tradition: evaluation of the political prospect of forest products and techniques in wood working industries (in Swedish). Prepared for 1990s Commission on Forest Policy. Report TRITA-TRT-1992-51. KTH, Wood Technology and Processing, Stockholm, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hansen E, Bush R (1996) Consumer perceptions of softwood lumber quality. Forest Prod J 46:29–34

    Google Scholar 

  4. Swearingen KA, Hansen EN, Reeb JE (1998) Customer preference for pacific northwest hardwoods. Forest Prod J 48:29–33

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hansen EN, Weinfurter S (1999) Softwood lumber quality requirements: examining the supplier/buyer perception gap. Wood Fiber Sci 31:83–94

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jahn LG, Bumgardner M, Forbes C, West C (2001) Consumer perceptions of character marks on cabinet doors. AG-617. Cooperative extension. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bumgardner M, Bush RJ, West CD (2001) Knots as an incongruent product feature: a demonstration of the potential for character-marked hardwood furniture. J Inst Wood Sci 15:327–336

    Google Scholar 

  8. Donovan GH, Nichols D (2003) Customer preferences and willingness to pay for character-marked cabinets from Alaska birch. Forest Prod J 53:27–32

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sheppard SRJ (2000) Visualization as a decision-support tool for managing forest ecosystems. Compiler 16:25–40

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rasmussen SE (1962) Experiencing architecture. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 245

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hesselgren S (1987) On architecture: an architectural theory based on psychological research. Chartwell-Bratt, Bromley, UK, p 310

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fridell Anter K (2000) What color is the red house? Perceived color of painted facades. Licentiate thesis, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, p 338

    Google Scholar 

  13. Svedmyr Å (2002) The materiality of the painted surface (in Swedish). Licentiate thesis, KTH Architecture, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  14. Daniel T, Meitner MM (2001) Representational validity of landscape visualizations: the effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. J Environ Psych 21:61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mitchell SA (1983) The effects of visual and emotional advertising: an information processing approach. In: Percy L, Woodside A (eds) Advertising and consumer psychology. Lexington Books. Lexington, MA, pp 197–217

    Google Scholar 

  16. Broudy HS (1987) The role of imagery in learning. Getty Center for Education in the Arts, Los Angeles, CA

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cox DJ (1990) The art of scientific visualization. Acad Comput 4:20–56

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tsunetsugu Y, Miyazaki Y, Sato H (2007) Physiological effects in humans induced by the visual stimulation of room interiors with different wood quantities. J Wood Sci 53:11–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nakamura M, Kondo T (2008) Quantification of visual inducement of knots by eye-tracking. J Wood Sci 54:22–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sakuragawa S, Miyazaki Y, Kaneko T, Makita T (2005) Infl uence of wood wall panels on physiological and psychological responses. J Wood Sci 51:136–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nordvik E, Broman O (2005) Visualizing wood interiors: a qualitative assessment of what people react to and how they describe it. Forest Prod J 55:81–86

    Google Scholar 

  22. Linn CE (1985) Meta product and market (in Swedish). Liber, Malmö

    Google Scholar 

  23. Glaser B, Strauss A (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine, Chicago, p 271

    Google Scholar 

  24. Broman NO (1995) Visual impressions of features in Scots pine wood surfaces. Forest Prod J 45:61–66

    Google Scholar 

  25. Patton MQ (1980) Qualitative evaluation methods. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  26. Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, p 338

    Google Scholar 

  27. Broman NO (1995) Two methods for measuring people’s preferences for wood. Mokuzai Gakkaishi 41:994–1005

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bishop ID, Leahy PNA (1989) Assessing the visual impact of development proposals: the validity of computer simulations. Landsc J 8:92–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Silverstein DA, Farrell JE (2001) Efficient method for paired comparison. J Electr Imaging 10:394–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Krueger R (1994) Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  31. Morgan D (1998) Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage, Newbury Park, CA

    Google Scholar 

  32. Flick U (2002) An introduction to qualitative research. Sage, London, p 310

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ford J (1975) Paradigms and fairytales: an introduction to the science of meanings. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  35. Beauchamp TL, Faden RJ, Wallace RJ, Walter L (1982) Ethical issues in social science research. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gilchrist AL (2007) Lightness and brightness. Curr Biol 17: R267–R269

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wyszecki G, Stiles WS (2000) Color science — concepts and methods, quantitative data and formulae, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Küller R (1975) Semantic description of environment (in Swedish). Psykologiförlaget AB Liber Tryck Stockholm, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  39. Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH (1957) The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jonsson O (2006) Upplevelse av trä — Studie om människors uppfattning om olika material (Experience of wood, in Swedish), Human product interaction, STFI-Packforsk (Swedish Pulp and Paper Research Institute)/Proteko, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  41. Jankowicz D (2004) The easy guide to repertory grids. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  42. Janols H, Stehn L (2004) Utilizing 3D-computer visualization for communicating aesthetics of long-span timber structures. Proceedings of the World Conference of Timber Engineering, Lathis, Finland, June 2004

  43. Johnsson H, Janols H, Stehn L (2006) 3D computer visualisation in timber construction: some important parameters. Architect Eng Des Manag 2:161–175

    Google Scholar 

  44. Janols H (2005) Communicating long-span timber structures with 3D computer visualisation. Licentiate thesis, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå

    Google Scholar 

  45. von Ehrenfels C (1890) Über Gestaltqualitäten (On the qualities of form). Vierteljahresschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie 14:249–292

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wertheimer M (1923) Laws of organization in perceptual forms. First published as Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt II, in: Psychologische Forschung 4:301–350. Translation published in: Ellis W (1938) A source book of Gestalt psychology. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, pp 71–88

    Google Scholar 

  47. Blosser PE (1973) Handbook of effective questioning techniques. Education Associates, Worthington, OH

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Wood Technology, Luleå University of Technology, 931 81, Skellefteå, Sweden

    Enar Nordvik & N. Olof Broman

Authors
  1. Enar Nordvik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. Olof Broman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Enar Nordvik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nordvik, E., Broman, N.O. Looking at computer-visualized interior wood: A qualitative assessment using focus groups. J Wood Sci 55, 113–120 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-008-1008-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-008-1008-y

Key words