Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
I thought you all might be interested in this snippet from a paper I was using this afternoon:
The car models in which the responses of the value-groups differ most are models that are typically seen as cars for young ambitious men. The ambitious experience significantly less contempt, dissatisfaction and boredom towards model C (Alfa 147) and significantly more admiration, fascination and satisfaction towards model B (Volkswagen Golf) that the lighthearted. Contrasting, the ambitious less admire and are more bored by the ‘family car’ model A (Fiat Multipla) than the lighthearted.
Source: Desmet, P., Hekkert, P. et al. (2003) Values and Emotions; An Empirical Investigation in the Relationship between Emotional Responses to Products and Human Values, 5th European Academy of Design Conference, 28-30 April, Barcelona.
dxg wrote:I thought you all might be interested in this snippet from a paper I was using this afternoon:
The car models in which the responses of the value-groups differ most are models that are typically seen as cars for young ambitious men. The ambitious experience significantly less contempt, dissatisfaction and boredom towards model C (Alfa 147) and significantly more admiration, fascination and satisfaction towards model B (Volkswagen Golf) that the lighthearted. Contrasting, the ambitious less admire and are more bored by the ‘family car’ model A (Fiat Multipla) than the lighthearted.
Source: Desmet, P., Hekkert, P. et al. (2003) Values and Emotions; An Empirical Investigation in the Relationship between Emotional Responses to Products and Human Values, 5th European Academy of Design Conference, 28-30 April, Barcelona.
Kind of affirms what we already suspected.
Deek
It's interesting, but apparently, the researchers themselves came up with 'ambitious'. It says: '...typically defined as ambitious...', or in other words, '...we think they're ambitious...'. They could have a proper source backing it up, but the 'typically' element has led me to believe otherwise.
Yeah, the authors use Rokeach's Value Survey and "adapted it for Dutch values" (didn't say how). Their analysis of the results of this survey caused them to divide their sample into "ambitious" and "lighthearted". Quite how they got to these two groups from the standard Rokech values of social life; career; empathy; carefree; prove myself; relax; safety; challenge; family life; independency; adjust; and own identity isn't exactly clear, either. All they say is they used "k-means cluster analysis" to identify two distinct populations within their sample.
I was just a bit surprised to find something related to you guys in my work.
That's odd, you'd expect them to be more specific on how they went form several to just two groups.
My SPSS tells me the following about K-Means Clusters:
This procedure attempts to identify relatively homogeneous groups of cases based on selected characteristics, using an algorithm that can handle large numbers of cases. However, the algorithm requires you to specify the number of clusters. You can specify initial cluster centers if you know this information. You can select one of two methods for classifying cases, either updating cluster centers iteratively or classifying only. You can save cluster membership, distance information, and final cluster centers. Optionally, you can specify a variable whose values are used to label casewise output. You can also request analysis of variance F statistics. While these statistics are opportunistic (the procedure tries to form groups that do differ), the relative size of the statistics provides information about each variable’s contribution to the separation of the groups.
Example. What are some identifiable groups of television shows that attract similar audiences within each group? With k-means cluster analysis, you could cluster television shows (cases) into k homogeneous groups based on viewer characteristics. This can be used to identify segments for marketing. Or you can cluster cities (cases) into homogeneous groups so that comparable cities can be selected to test various marketing strategies.
It's called "fishing." Playing around with the stats until you get something interesting. No prior hypotheses. Seems to be valid method in the social sciences, apparently!
For anyone who doesn't know what K-Means Clustering is:
K-means clustering divides "something" into groups based on their expression patterns. The goal is to produce groups of "anything" with a high degree of similarity within each group and a low degree of similarity between groups. Unlike self-organizing maps, k-means clustering is not designed to show the relationship between clusters. Instead, k-means clusters are constructed so that the average behavior in each group is distinct from any of the other groups.
Well, tonight, I have been mostly trying to work out if an organisation's values are distinct from its culture or if they are/can be dealt with as if they're same thing, as both "give rise" or are evidenced in the norms of its members.
It's now twenty to two and I haven't written it up yet (need it for tomorrow).
I'd think that if a company's values are significantly different from its culture, there's something wrong. Just common sense btw, no science present here.
Yeah, current thinking seems to be saying that they're the same (and if not actually the same, can be treated as the same) because they're both normative.
im about to drop off the net again and go back to the lappy (word processing at 640 resolution is a weird experience) in order to try and fill in about half the pages of a 26 page assignment
soon as i've finished tidying up the department floor plan scan for page 3 in paint shop...
*head goes splode*
an' to think my feet hurting after a hard days cashiering used to be the most of my worries
