在資訊爆炸與物質過剩的當代社會中，消費者的價值觀正由炫耀性消費轉向追求內在品質與審美平衡的生活方式。簡約風格強調「少即是多」的設計理念與理性、純淨的美學特徵，逐漸成為當代產品設計的重要趨勢。簡約設計不僅反映出永續意識與生活態度的轉變，更在視覺上影響消費者對產品品質與價值的感知。然而，現有研究多著重於理念層面的討論或單一品牌分析，對於簡約風格在跨產品領域中的具體造形特徵與感知對應仍缺乏系統性的探討。
本研究旨在探討當代產品設計中簡約風格的造形特徵及其感知意象。研究選取北歐與日本之家具、燈具與餐具產品作為樣本，透過焦點團體訪談以評價構造法萃取受訪者對簡約風格之具體造形特徵與抽象感受，並總結 21 項特徵，繼而以數量化 III 類分析建構簡約風格之造形特徵，並透過集群分析歸納特徵群集。
研究結果顯示，當代簡約風格可由兩條軸向加以定位，由「高—低視覺密度」反映產品之結構表現；第二軸「通透輕盈—沉穩凝聚」反映視覺量感。依兩軸將樣本劃分為「高密度通透」、「低密度通透」、「低密度沉穩」與「高密度沉穩」四種簡約類型。透過集群分析，21 項造形特徵歸納為「原木結構」、「光的漫射」、「柔和一體」與「純粹瓷質」四個特徵群—其中「柔和一體」為跨類別共享之特徵群集，構成簡約之共通基礎。此結果說明簡約並非單一風格，而是可沿兩軸定位、由不同途徑達成之多元造形特徵。
本研究將原本抽象、主觀的簡約美學，轉化為可被系統性拆解與分析之物理造形特徵，並以建構之兩軸架構、四種簡約類型與四個特徵群可作為設計師操作簡約風格之具體參考，協助其於產品開發中更有效地傳達簡約之視覺意象與品牌一致性。

In contemporary society, characterized by information overload and material abundance, consumers' values have gradually shifted from conspicuous consumption toward lifestyles that emphasize intrinsic quality and aesthetic balance. Simplicity, guided by the design philosophy of "less is more" and characterized by a rational and refined aesthetic, has become an important trend in contemporary product design. Beyond reflecting increasing awareness of sustainability and changing lifestyles, simplicity also shapes consumers' perceptions of product quality and value through its visual expression. However, existing studies have primarily focused on conceptual discussions or analyses of individual brands, while systematic investigations into the form characteristics of simplicity across different product categories and their associated perceptual imagery remain limited.
This study aims to investigate the form characteristics and perceptual imagery of simplicity in contemporary product design. Furniture, lighting, and tableware products from Scandinavian and Japanese design traditions were selected as research samples. Using focus group interviews in conjunction with the Evaluation Grid Method (EGM), participants' perceptions of simplicity were elicited to identify both concrete form characteristics and abstract perceptual impressions. A total of twenty-one form characteristics were extracted. Subsequently, Quantification Theory Type III was employed to construct a framework of the form characteristics of simplicity, and cluster analysis was conducted to identify groups of related characteristics.
The results indicate that contemporary simplicity can be interpreted along two principal dimensions. The first dimension, “High–Low visual density”, represents the structural expression of a product, while the second dimension, “Transparent and lightweight–Solid and cohesive”, reflects its perceived visual mass. Based on these two dimensions, the samples were classified into four types of simplicity: “High-density transparent”, “Low-density transparent”, “Low-density solid”, and “High-density solid”. Cluster analysis further grouped the twenty-one form characteristics into four characteristic clusters: “Natural wood structure”, “Light diffusion”, “Soft integrated”, and “Pure ceramics”. Among these, “Soft integrated” emerged as a shared characteristic across all product categories, forming the common foundation of simplicity. These findings demonstrate that simplicity is not a single, homogeneous style but rather a multidimensional design approach that can be positioned along two perceptual dimensions and achieved through different combinations of form characteristics.
This study transforms the abstract and subjective aesthetics of simplicity into a systematic framework of analyzable form characteristics. The proposed two-dimensional framework, four types of simplicity, and four characteristic clusters provide practical guidance for designers in applying simplicity to product development, enabling them to communicate the visual imagery of simplicity more effectively while maintaining consistency in product identity and brand expression.

Abbas, B. A. H., Bahia, T. H. A., & MousaSabti, Y. (2021). The effect of visual simplicity in product design on the quality and aesthetic of the product. Multicultural Education, 7(8), 628-634.
Blijlevens, J., Creusen, M. E., & Schoormans, J. P. (2009). How consumers perceive product appearance: The identification of three product appearance attributes. International Journal of design, 3(3), 27-35.
Chan, C. S. (2000). Can style be measured?. Design studies, 21(3), 277-291.
Chen, K. (1995). Form generation and style association. Illinois Institute of Technology. Chen, K., & Owen, C. L. (1997). Form language and style description. Design studies, 18(3), 249-274.
Guerrero, C. L. (2024). The Impact of Minimalist Design on Consumer’s Brand Expectations.
Gumber, S. (2023). Minimalism in design: A trend of simplicity in complexity. Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(2), 357-365.
Jain, V. K., Gupta, A., & Verma, H. (2023). Goodbye materialism: exploring antecedents of minimalism and its impact on millennials well-being. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1.
Karg, C. (2015). New fashion minimalism in an affluent society: A paradigm shift?.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs theory. New York: Norton (London: reprinted by Routledge)
Kuang, Y., & Zhang, W. (2017, May). The application of minimalist style in interior design. In 3rd International Conference on Arts, Design and Contemporary Education (ICADCE 2017) (pp. 410-414). Atlantis Press.
Nikolic, M., & Vasilski, D. (2018). Minimalism in contemporary architecture as one of the most usable aesthetically-functional patterns. Facta Universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 15(3), 333-345.
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the nutrition society, 63(4), 655-660.
Schwartz, M., Weiss, T., Ataer-Cansizoglu, E., & Choi, J. W. (2020). Style similarity as feedback for product design. In A New Perspective of Cultural DNA (pp. 27-42). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
Ton, L. A. N., Smith, R. K., & Sevilla, J. (2024). Symbolically simple: How simple packaging design influences willingness to pay for consumable products. Journal of Marketing, 88(2), 121-140.
向哲緯 & 丑宛茹 (2017)。簡約風格的設計手法應用於家飾品之設計。 實踐設計學報, (1), 150-172。[Hsiang, C. W., & Chou, W. J. (2017). Application of simplicity design methods to the design of home accessories. Journal of Shih Chien Design, (1), 150–172.]
林東龍, & 余佳芳 (2005) 。符號意象在產品造形上之探討-以義大利設計風格為例。
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 19-27。[Lin, T. L., & Yu, C. F. (2005). A study of symbolic images in product form: An example of Italian design style. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 19–27.]
林銘煌 (2012) 。極簡主義在設計上的形式表徵與發展趨向。設計學報 (Journal of Design), 17(1) 。[Lin, M. H. (2012). Formal representations and developmental trends of minimalism in design. Journal of Design, 17(1).]
柯建鋒 (2010) 。由「無印良品」探討東方簡約設計風格之應用。 國立臺灣科技大學設計研究所學位論文。[Ko, C. F. (2010). Exploring the application of Eastern simplicity design style through Muji (Unpublished master’s thesis). Graduate Institute of Design, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan.]
馬敏元 (2022) 。閱讀魅力與感性體驗設計－從感性研究談起。國立成功大學圖書館館刊，(31)，14-30。[Ma, M. Y. (2022). Reading appeal and Kansei experience design: A discussion from the perspective of Kansei research. National Cheng Kung University Library Newsletter, (31), 14–30.]
馬敏元 (2010) 。淺談日本新產品開發之感［心］技術. 工業材料，280,160-172。[Ma, M. Y. (2010). An overview of Kansei technology in Japanese new product development. Industrial Materials Monthly, 280, 160–172.]
高清漢 (2009) 。從風格原型–看泳鏡造形特徵與意象的關係。設計學報 (Journal of Design), 7(1) 。[Kao, C. H. (2009). Exploring the relationship between form characteristics and images of swimming goggles from style prototypes. Journal of Design, 7(1).]
高凱寧, 鄧成連, & 張文德. (2009). 焦點團體訪談法在工業設計之應用研究-以遠距協同設計案為例. 設計學報 (Journal of Design), 9(3). [Kao, K. N., Teng, C. L., & Chang, W. T. (2009). An applied study of the focus group interview method in industrial design: A case study of a remote collaborative design project. Journal of Design, 9(3).]
章美英, & 許麗齡. (2006). 質性研究-焦點團體訪談法之簡介與應用. 護理雜誌, 53(2), 67-72. [Chang, M. Y., & Hsu, L. L. (2006). Qualitative research: An introduction and application of the focus group interview method. The Journal of Nursing, 53(2), 67–72.]
郭孔齡(2014) 。簡約設計風格應用之個案研究─以小茶栽堂為例。國立嘉義大學視覺藝術學系學位論文。[Kuo, K. L. (2014). A case study on the application of simplicity design style: The case of Hsiao Cha Zai Tang (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Visual Arts, National Chiayi University, Taiwan.]
陳永祥(2009) 。造型特徵因子對產品識別之影響。國立台灣科技大學設計學系學位論文。[Chen, Y. H. (2009). The influence of form characteristic factors on product identification (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Design, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan.]
陳怡如, 張庭禎, & 劉沛盈 (2015) 。消費者對無印良品產品風格造形要素之偏好。圖文傳播藝術學報, 113-139。[Chen, Y. J., Chang, T. C., & Liu, P. Y. (2015). Consumers’ preferences for form elements of Muji product styles. Journal of Graphic Communication Arts, 113–139.]
陳俊智(2005) 。造形特徵與風格演變的相關性研究-以圈椅設計為例. 高雄師大學報:自然科學與科技類, (9), 27-43。[Chen, C. C. (2005). A study on the relationship between form characteristics and style evolution: A case study of armchair design. Kaohsiung Normal University Journal: Natural Sciences and Technology, (9), 27– 43.]
陳俊智(2009) 。以坐椅設計為例探討中西設計風格的認知與判斷。設計學報 (Journal of Design) , 6(2)。[Chen, C. C. (2009). Exploring the cognition and judgment of Eastern and Western design styles through chair design. Journal of Design, 6(2).]
陳盈志, 沈易霖, 蔡麗梅 & 林東龍(2011) 。家電產品造形之設計風格探討-以日本±0品牌為例。工業設計, (24), 40-44。[Chen, Y. C., Shen, Y. L., Tsai, L. M., & Lin, T. L. (2011). A study of design styles in household appliance forms: A case study of the Japanese ±0 brand. Industrial Design, (24), 40–44.]
馮永華 & 楊裕富(2008) 。[設計風格] 形成因素之研究。設計學報 (Journal of Design), 11(3) 。[Feng, Y. H., & Yang, Y. F. (2008). A study on the factors contributing to the formation of design styles. Journal of Design, 11(3).]
馮宇(2015) 。極簡風格之產品形塑研究-以生活用品設計創作為例。 臺灣師範大學設計學系學位論文。[Feng, Y. (2015). A study on product shaping of minimalism style: An example of daily product design creation (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Design, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.]
劉豐安 & 劉育東(2005) 。設計媒材與風格的關聯研究 (Doctoral dissertation) 。[Liu, F. A., & Liu, Y. D. (2005). A study on the relationship between design media and styles (Doctoral dissertation).]
蔡伊媜, 李嘉芳, 黃瑜婷, & 蔡宜均. (2023) 。 15-25 歲男女性消費者對於化妝品包裝設計購買意願之研究. 美容科技學刊, 20(1), 73-86。[Tsai, Y. C., Li, C. F., Huang, Y. T., & Tsai, Y. C. (2023). A study on purchase intentions of male and female consumers aged 15–25 toward cosmetic packaging design. Journal of Beauty Science and Technology, 20(1), 73–86.]
魅力工学研究フォーラム 編輯 (1992).魅力工学 魅力的な空間･商品を生みだす技術. 海文堂。[Kansei Engineering Research Forum (Ed.). (1992). Kansei engineering: Technologies for creating attractive spaces and products. Kaibundo.]
賴亭羽, 張若菡 & 程東奕(2018)。應用評價構造法於動物類型扭蛋玩具魅力因子探究。商業設計學報，(22)，151-171。[Lai, T. Y., Chang, J. H., & Cheng, T. Y. (2018). Exploring attractiveness factors of animal-type capsule toys using the evaluation grid method. Journal of Commercial Design, (22), 151–171.]
薛美禪(2002) 。極簡主義之理念在現代設計中實踐之研究-以德, 義, 日為例。臺灣師範大學工業教育學系學位論文。[Hsieh, M. C. (2002). A study on the practice of minimalism concepts in modern design: Cases of Germany, Italy, and Japan (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Industrial Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.]
讃井純一郎, & 乾正雄. (1986). レパートリー・グリッド発展手法による住環境評価構造の抽出: 認知心理学に基づく住環境評価に関する研究 (1).日本建築学会計画系論文報告集, 367, 15-22. [Sawai, J., & Inui, M. (1986). Extraction of evaluation structures for residential environments using the repertory grid development method: Studies on residential environment evaluation based on cognitive psychology (1). Transactions of the Architectural Institute of Japan, Planning Series, 367, 15–22.]