Street signs, logos, and buttons are just a few of the objects which communicate through the use of icons, symbols, and metaphors. When understood in context, these icons can express meaning instantaneously. Certain symbols carry strong emotional connections due to the history of experiences they evoke.
The textural icons project began by asking how texture and the sense of touch could perform a similar mode of communication to that of a visual icon. Physiologically, the sense of touch has a close connection to emotional feedback and intimacy.
A qualitative research project was conducted by having participants perform a variety of exploratory exercises while feeling 32 inscribed textural patterns. The following is a list of the exercises:
1. Without seeing the texture, feel it and try to sketch how each texture looks.
2. While feeling the texture, describe the emotion each texture evokes.
3. While feeling the texture, describe the object each texture evokes.
4. While feeling the texture, describe what action each texture would perform if it were a button on an interface.
Participants varied in their ability to draw connections between what they physically felt and what their mind recalled. In general, most participants were able to perceive both the tactile quality of textures and associate common emotions.
Paticipants asked to touch a texture and answer what it communicated.
Without seeing the texture, participants were asked to feel it and try to sketch how the texture looks.
Follow-up interviews with certain participants were conducted for asking why they selected certain words or emotions for specific textures. Through this processs emerged an understanding what aspects of a texture have communicative power and what types of meaning are associated to produce the new textural meaning. Participants frequently related the inscribed textures to existing natural and man–made textures and could also associate the textures with visual icons. Using these referenced meanings in combination with the tactile quality was a shared method for generating new meaning amongst all participants.
Textures were found to have multiple qualities:
Emotive quality (Irritating)
Visual quality (Chaotic)
Tactile quality (Random)
Active quality (Scratching or itching)
Six pairs of standards emerged from this research:
Static vs. Directional
Inward vs. Outward
Artificial vs. Natural
Controlled vs. Chaotic
Repetitive vs. Growing
Simplicity vs. Complexity
These qualities and standards could serve as tools for designers in the process of developing textures for the purpose of communicating certain emotional meaning.
Equally as interesting is the differentiation of meaning from one individual to the next. From the aspect of individualized and unique methods of communication, it’s intriguing to imagine the types of textural icons a small group of friends might develop for communicating hyper-specific emotional states.
In the experiments to which this research was applied, my work focused on the responses of one participant in particular. Though this participant’s responses represent well the collection as a whole, the applications could also be considered specific to him.
