Ahşap mobilya tüketicilerinin değer ilişkilerinde malzeme, kalite ve kimliğin algısal etki modeli

Öz

Ahşap, mobilya ürünleri bağlamında hem bir malzeme hem de sembolik, estetik ve kimlik şekillendirici bir ortam olarak aynı anda işlev görmektedir. Bu çalışma, algısal ve duygusal faktörlerin, ahşap bazlı mobilya segmentinde malzeme ile ilgili değer oluşumunu ve satın alma niyetini nasıl etkilediğini incelemektedir. Nöroestetik ve kimlik psikolojisi temelli olarak, Dokunsal Etki Modeli (Perceptual Impact Model) geliştirilmiş ve Duygusal Duyusal Yük İndeksi (ESLI), Algılanan Zanaatkârlık Ayırt Ediciliği İndeksi (PCDI), Estetik Bilişsel Aktivasyon İndeksi (ACAI) ve Kimlik Rezonans Katsayısı (IRQ) dahil olmak üzere dokuz psikometrik göstergeyle test edilmiştir. Veriler, çalışmanın tematik ve psikografik hedefleriyle uyumu sağlayacak kriterlere göre seçilen 145 katılımcıdan toplanmıştır. İstatistiksel analizler, estetik tutarlılığın ve sembolik özdeşleşmenin tüketici bağlılığı üzerindeki önemli etkisini doğrulamıştır (örneğin, yüksek hassasiyet grubunda IRQ %41 artış, p < 0,01). Bulgular, çok duyulu etkileşim, zanaatkârlık algısı ve öz imge ile malzeme estetiği arasındaki uyum gibi temel itici faktörleri vurgulamaktadır. Model, öznel deneyimleri nicel göstergelere dönüştürerek stratejik tasarım ve marka kararlarını sağlamlaştırmakta, ahşap bazlı değer zinciri genelinde sürdürülebilir yeniliği desteklemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ahşap-temelli malzeme bağlılığı
• Ahşap-temelli ürün stratejisi
• Değer entegrasyonu
• Etki modeli
• Karar desteği

A perceptual impact model of material, quality, and identity in wood furniture consumers’ value associations

Öz

Wood functions simultaneously as a material and as a symbolic, aesthetic, and identity-shaping medium in the context of furniture products. This study investigates how perceptual and emotional factors influence material-related value formation and purchase intention within the wood-based furniture segment. Based on neuroaesthetics and identity psychology, a novel Perceptual Impact Model was developed and tested using nine psychometric indices, including the Emotional Sensory Load Index (ESLI), Perceived Craft Distinctiveness Index (PCDI), Aesthetic Cognitive Activation Index (ACAI), and Identity Resonance Quotient (IRQ). Data were collected from 145 participants selected according to criteria ensuring thematic and psychographic alignment with the aims of the study. Statistical analyses confirmed the significant influence of aesthetic coherence and symbolic identification on consumer engagement (e.g., IRQ ↑41% in the high-sensitivity group, p < 0.01). The findings highlight key drivers such as multisensory engagement, craftsmanship perception, and the alignment between self-image and material aesthetics. By translating subjective experience into quantifiable metrics, the model strengthens strategic design and branding decisions, supporting sustainable innovation across the wood-based value chain.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Wood-based material attachment
• Wood-based product strategy
• Value integration
• Impact model
• Decision support

Kaynakça

1. Al Darwish, L., (2023). Green furniture: Sustainability, consumer choice, and market analysis in an evolving landscape, Ontario College of Art and Design University. https://openresearch.ocadu.ca/id/eprint/4071, Last access: 21.08.2025.
2. Bond, J., Parker, M., and Spennemann, D.H.R., (2024). Sensory perception in cultural studies; a review of sensorial and multisensorial heritage, The Senses and Society, 19(2), 233–251, DOI: 10.1080/17458927.2023.2284532
3. Bourdieu, P., (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Chatterjee, A., and Vartanian, O., (2016). Neuroscience of aesthetics, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1), 172–194, DOI: 10.1111/nyas.13035
5. Clark, A., (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181–204, DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X12000477
6. Csikszentmihalyi, M., and Rochberg-Halton, E., (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self, Cambridge University Press, DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139167611
7. Danielsson, P., (2025). The role of multi-sensory marketing in shaping consumers' brand perceptions, Aalto University. https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/items/6966a6c8-6851-4cbd-b161-31904b08ee69, son erişim tarihi: 09.09.2025.
8. De Luca, A., and Termini, S., (1972). A definition of a nonprobabilistic entropy in the setting of fuzzy set theory. Information and Control, 20(4), 301–312, DOI: 10.1016/S0019-9958(72)90199-4

9. Dharsono, W.W., (2025). Visual and emotional connections in wooden product design: A comprehensive review of neuro-architecture principles, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Architecture, 4(1), DOI: 10.24002/jarina.v4i1.10160
10. Dormer, P., (1997). The culture of craft: Status and future, Manchester University Press.
11. Earnshaw, R., (2017). Art, design and technology: Collaboration and implementation, Springer, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-58121-7
12. Gibson, J.J., (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception, Houghton Mifflin, Boston (reprint: Psychology Press, 2015). https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-00063-000, Last access: 09.09.2025.
13. Grayson, K., and Martinec, R., (2004). Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings, Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 296–312, DOI: 10.1086/422109
14. Harju, C., and Lähtinen, K., (2021). Perceptions of wooden interior product quality — insights on sustainability views among Finnish consumers, Natural Resources Institute Finland.
15. https://jukuri.luke.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/551249/Harju_et_al_2021.pdf, Last access: 20.09.2025.
16. Hosey, L., (2012). The shape of green: Aesthetics, ecology, and design, Island Press, Washington, DC.
17. Ji, S., and Lin, P., (2022). Aesthetics of sustainability: Research on the design strategies for emotionally durable visual communication design, Sustainability, 14(8), 4649, DOI: 10.3390/su14084649
18. Karana, E., Barati, B., Rognoli, V., and van der Laan, A.Z., (2015). Material driven design (MDD): A method to design for material experiences, International Journal of Design, 9(2), 35–54.
19. Kim, J., and Heo, W., (2021). Interior design with consumers’ perception about art, brand image, and sustainability, Sustainability, 13(8), 4557, DOI: 10.3390/su13084557
20. Kirmani, A., (2009). The self and the brand, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 271–275, DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.011
21. Ko, K.K.H., (2017). Understanding the role of product attachment with a view to enabling sustainable consumption: A study of household furniture, PhD Dissertation, University of New South Wales (UNSW).
22. https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/bitstreams/0bfe834d-0a6f-4161-8b4b-239c0424c5f4/download, Last access: 25.09.2025.
23. Krippendorff, K., (2019). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications. DOI: 10.4135/9781071878781
24. Manna, R., (2025). Do we need “new”?: Rethinking trends through emotional connections, sustainable design, and cultural heritage, Master’s Thesis, OCAD University. https://openresearch.ocadu.ca/id/eprint/4765, Last access: 22.09.2025.
25. Manu, T., Nazmi, A.R., Shahri, B., and Emerson, N., (2022). Biocomposites: A review of materials and perception, Materials Today Communications, 31, 103308, DOI: 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.103308
26. Miller, D., (2010). Stuff, Polity Press, Cambridge.
27. Pedgley, O., Rognoli, V., and Karana, E., (2016). Materials experience as a foundation for materials and design education, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(4), 613–630, DOI: 10.1007/s10798-015-9327-y
28. Pine, B.J., and Gilmore, J.H., (2007). Authenticity: What consumers really want, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston.
29. Plassmann, H., Ramsøy, T.Z., and Milosavljevic, M., (2012). Branding the brain: A critical review and outlook, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(1), 18–36, DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.010
30. Schifferstein, H.N.J., and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, E.P.H., (2008). Consumer-product attachment: Measurement and design implications, International Journal of Design, 2(3), 1–13.
31. http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/325/205, Last access: 14.09.2025.
32. Spence, C., (2020). Senses of place: Architectural design for the multisensory mind, Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1), 40, DOI:10.1186/s41235-020-00243-4
33. Stern, T., and Schwarzbauer, P., (2013). Consumer behavior towards eco-friendly products: Wood products certification, consumer behavior and its climate policy potential, International Conference on Resource
34. Efficiency in Interorganizational Networks, 13–14 November 2013, Graz, Austria. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.3364.2243
35. Sztuka, I.M., Becker, M., and Kühn, S., (2025). Neural representations underlying psychological responses to natural and artificial features in indoor architecture, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 103, 102553, DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102553
36. Thakral, P.P., Moo, L.R., and Slotnick, S.D., (2012). A neural mechanism for aesthetic experience, NeuroReport, 23(5), 310–313, DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e328351759f
37. Wang, B., An, S., and Li, K., (2025). Shaping green choices: How sensory cues drive behavior of wood-plastic composites, Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), 383, DOI: 10.3390/bs15030383