感性工學在產品開發上是重要的工具，而對產品以感性語彙分類，以及感性的量化一直是感性工學發展的重點。
通用標記尺度在味覺的研究上被證實能產出比率尺度的資料，而且相比其它能產出比率尺度資料的量尺，如Magnitude Estimation，通用標記尺度有易於施行的優點。本研究目的在於應用通用標記尺度於感性工學的研究中。本研究使用汽車做為樣本，用以建構通用標記尺度。
本研究採用消費者報導 (Consumer Union, 2007)的分類中的19輛汽車，和5個與汽車相關的感性語彙 (Ma & Shieh, 2005)對32個受測者做實驗。實驗的結果顯示雖然通用標記尺度所使用的標記有明顯的差異()，但是受測者對於各個感性語彙下的標記評價也有明顯差異。感性語彙的差異可能來自受測者的現狀偏誤 (Kahneman, Knetsch, & Thaler, 1991)，但仍需更多的實驗證明。
與其他標記尺度的比較顯示所有的標記尺度有類似的標記排序，標記尺度間的差別顯示在尺度最大量的差異上。

Kansei engineering has been proved a powerful customer-oriented tool in product development. By Kansei engineering, the general images or Kansei of products from potential customers are collected, interpreted, and transformed into features or functions of products. So categorization and scaling of Kansei take important part in the field of Kansei engineering.
It is proven that the labeled magnitude scale (the LMS) yield ratio properties as magnitude estimation in previous oral sensations researches. And comparing to other methods with ratio properties, like the magnitude estimation or magnitude matching, the LMS is easier to apply. The goal of this study is to apply labeled magnitude scales in the context of Kansei researches therefore data with ratio-level can be retrieved easily and extensive statistic analysis can be carried out. In this study, an experiment of scale derivation will be conducted based on the methodology in the research of Green et al. (G.Green, S.Shaffer, & M.Gilmore, 1993). The purpose of this study is to construct a Kansei labeled magnitude scale of chosen products. The chosen product in this study is passenger cars.
Following the categories of passenger cars in 2008 consumer report buyers’ guide, nineteen car models out of twenty-one categories are selected as samples of this experiment. Five Kansei phrases are chosen by picking one phrase out of a pair of Kansei phrases in five pairs of Kansei phrases (Ma & Shieh, 2005). All subjects in this experiment are students of industrial design department, and the subjects have taken at least three years of design education.
Thirty- two subjects participated in the experiment during one week. Analysis of the subjects’ data indicated that the rating of intensity descriptors significantly varied and data from different gender are not significantly varied .But analysis also shown subjects in the experiment gave rating in different ways to each Kansei phrases . The geometric means of intensity descriptors are used as the positions of labels on the Kansei labeled magnitude scale.
The difference may due to the status quo bias (Kahneman, Knetsch, & Thaler, 1991)because subjects rate the sample with their own status quo, and each Kansei phases has different default values, the status quo. This assumption needs to be examined in further researches.
Labeled magnitude scale of five Kansei phrases were compared to OPUS (Meilgaard, Civille, & Carr, 2007) and CALM (Cardello, Winterhalter, & Shuntz, 2003). All scales compared were affective scales based on the taxonomy of Meilgaard and his colleagues. In all scales, the order of intensity descriptors was similar. Difference of these scales appeared at the maximum magnitude of the scales.

Alf, E. F., & Grossberg, J. M. (1979). The geometric mean:Confidence limits and significant tests. Perception & Psychophysics , 5 (26), pp. 419-421.
Bartoshuk, L. M., Duffy, V. B., Chapo, A. K., Fast, K., Yiee, J. H., Hoffman, H. J., et al. (2004). From psychophysics to the clinic: missteps and advances. Food Quality and Preference , 15, pp. 617-632.
Bartoshuk, L., Duffy, V., Green, B., Hoffman, H., Ko, C.-W., L.A.Lucchina, et al. (2004). Valid across-group comparisons with labled scales:the gLMS versus magnitude matching. Physiology & Behavior , 82, pp. 109-114.
Bartoshuka, L., Duffy, V., Fasta, K., Green, B., Prutkina, J., & Snydera, D. (2002). Labeled scales (e.g., category, Likert, VAS) and invalid across-group comparisons: what we have learned from genetic variation in taste. Food Quality and Preference , 22, pp. 125-138.
Cardello, V. A., Winterhalter, C., & Shuntz, G. H. (2003). Predicting the Handle and Comfort of Military Clothing Fabrics from Sensory and Instrumental Data: Development and Application of New Psychophysical Methods. Textile Research Journal , pp. 221-237.
Chan, H.-C., Lai, H.-H., & Chang, Y.-M. (2006). Expression modes used by consumers in conveying desire for product form: A case study of a car. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics , 36, pp. 3-10.
Consumer Union. (2007). Consumer Reports Buying Guide 2008. Yonker, NY: Consumer Union.
Dionne, R. A., Bartoshuk, L. M., Mogil, J., & Witter, J. (2005). Individual responder analyses for pain:does one pain scale fit all? TRENDS in Pharmacological Sciences , 26 (3), pp. 125-130.
G.Butler, L.M.Poste, M.S.Wolynetz, V.E.Agar, & E.Larmond. (1987). Alternative Analyses of Magnitude Estimation Data. Journal of Sensory Studies , 2, pp. 243-257.
G.Green, B., S.Shaffer, G., & M.Gilmore, M. (1993). Derivation and evaluation of a semantic scale of oral. Chemical Senses , 18 (6), pp. 683-702.
Griep, M. I., Borg, E., Collys, K., & Massalt, D. L. (1998). Category Ratio Scale as An Alternative to Magnitude Matching for Age-related Taste And Odour Perception. Food Quality and Preference , 9 (1/2), pp. 67-72.
Guest, S., Essick, G., Patel, A., Prajapati, R., & McGlone, F. (2007). Labeled magnitude scales for oral sensations of wetness, dryness, pleasantness and unpleasantness. Food Quality and Preference , 18, pp. 342-352.
Guest, S., Essick, G., Patel, A., Prajapati, R., & McGlone, F. (2007). Labeled magnitude scales for oral sensations of wetness,dryness, pleasantness and unpleasantness. Food Quality and Preference vol.18 pp.342–352 .
ISO. (1994). Sensory Analysis-Methodology-Magnitude Estimation. International Standrard ISO 11056 . 11 West 42nd St.,New York, NY 10036, U.S.: American National Standard Institude.
ISO. (1999). Snsory Analysis-Guideline for the use of Quantitative Response Scales. Draft International Standard ISO CD 4121 .
K.Amasaka, & S.Nagasawa. (2003). The method of Sensory Evaluation and Its Application. Taipei: Wu-Nan Culture Enterprise.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies:The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspective , 5 (1), pp. 193-206.
Ma, C.-C., & Shieh, M.-D. (2005). Using Neural Networks in Automobile Shape Feature Design. Tainan: NCKU.
Meilgaard, M. C., Civille, G. V., & Carr, B. T. (2007). Seosory Evaluation Techniques, Fourth Edition. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor &Francis Group.
Nagamachi, M. (1995). Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics , pp. 3-11.
Nagamachi, M. (2002). Technical note:Kansei engineering as a powerful consumer-oriented technology for product development. Applied Ergonomics , 33, pp. 289-294.
Noble, B. J., Kaiser, P., Borg, G. A., Jacobs, I., & Ceci, R. (1983). A category-ratio perceived exertion scale:relationship to blood and muscle lactates and heart rate. Medicein and science in sport and exercise , 15 (6), pp. 523-528.
Peryam, D., & Pilgrim, F. (1957). Hedonic scale method of measuring food prefernces. Food Technol. , 11, pp. 9-14.
S.S.Stevens. (1970). Neural events and the psychophysical law. Science , 170, p. 1043.
Salvador Mondrago′ n, P. C. (2005). Measuring consumer perceptions for a better comprehension,specification and assessment of product semantics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics , 35, pp. 1021–1029.
Schutz, H. G., & V.Cardello, A. (2001). A Labeled Affective Magnitude(LAM) Scale for Assessing Food Liking/disliking. Journal of Sensory Studies , 16, pp. 117-159.
Stevens, S. (1957). On the psychophysical law. Psychological Review , 64, pp. 153-181.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss Aversion and Riskless Choice: A Reference Dependent Model. Quarterly Journal of Economics , pp. 1039-1061.
V., C. A., C., W., & Schutz, H. G. (2003). Predicting the handle and comfort of military clothing fabrics from sensory and instrumental data: Development and application of new psychophysical methods. Textile Research Journal , 73, pp. 221-237.
V., C. A., G., S. H., L., L. L., & E., M. (2005). Development and testing of a labeled magnitude scale of perceived satiety. Appetite , 44, pp. 1-13.
V.Cardello, A., & Schutz, H. G. (2004). Research note:Numerical scale-point locations for constructing the LAM(labeled affective magnutide)scale. Journal of Sensory Studies , 19 (4), pp. 341-346.
Wong, J.-S., & Chen, L.-L. (2004). A Study on the Relationship of Automobile Shape Morphing to Affective and Aesthetic Responses. Taipei: NTUST.