Studi persepsi visual perempuan pengendara terhadap desain sepeda motor skuter matik di Indonesia

Linda Lukita, Achmad Syarief, Slamet Riyadi, Andar Bagus Sriwarno


This study is an evaluation of perception and identification of attractive scooter design by female motorcycle riders. Survey with questionaire using Likert scale was conducted on 150 female scooter riders who provided assesment of six scooter design representing design of scooter in Indonesia. Descriptive analysis results show that scooter designs in Indonesia have perception: quality, comfortable to use, can be used by all family members, fun to use, relax and easy, and give confidence, which included in physio, socio, and psycho-pleasure also only reached the visceral and behavioral stage.Female riders’ perception is inline with the female gender characteristics, communal and have high empathy or emotional skill. Attractive scooter design for female riders has ideo-pleasure related perception and is determined from the details of the product design. From the factor analysis, it is described the pleasurability factors has different perception for each design. Conclusion of this study is beside size, type, and design characters, total shape as well as the details of the shape from the scooter design are the things that will affect the perception of the female rider and may provide a different perception of pleasurability evaluation from the female riders.


visual perception, shape, scooter, gender difference, female rider, pleasurability

Full Text:



Asosiasi Industri Sepeda Motor Indonesia. (2019). Data pasar sepeda motor tahun 2000-2018 dan persentase kontribusi tipe skuter matik. Retrieved from Asosiasi Industri Sepeda Motor Indonesia: /statistic/

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2018a). Data perkembangan jumlah kendaraan bermotor menurut jenis 1949-2018. Retrieved from Badan Pusat Statistik: /view/id/1133

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2018b). Data proyeksi penduduk Indonesia 2015-2045. Jakarta: Badan Pusat Statistik.

Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The essential difference: men, women and the extreme male brain. New York: Penguin/Basic Books.

Darley, W. K., & Smith, R. E. (1995). Gender differences in information processing strategies: an empirical test of the selectivity model in advertising response. Journal Advertising, 24(1), 41-56.

Hampson, E., van Anders, S. M., & Mullin, L. I. (2006). A female advantage in the recognition of emotional facial expressions: Test of an evolutionary hypothesis. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 27(6), 401-416.

Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing pleasurable products: an introduction to the new human factors. London: Taylor & Francis.

Lippa, R. A. (2010). Gender differences in personality and interest: when, where, and why? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(11), 1098-1110.

Macdonald, A. S. (1999). Aesthetic intellegence: a cultural tool. In Contemporary Ergonomics (pp. 95-99). London: Taylor & Francis.

Massar, K., & Buunk, A. P. (2013). Gender differences in adolescent advertising response: The role of involvement and message claim. Psychology, 4(07), 547-552.

Meyers-Levy, J. (1989). Gender differences in information processing: A selectivity interpretation. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Meyers-Levy, J., & Loken, B. (2015). Revisiting gender differences: What we know and what lies ahead. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 129-149.

Mitchell, V. W., & Walsh, G. (2004). Gender differences in German consumer decision-making styles. Journal Consumer Behaviour, 3(4), 331-346.

Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Book.

Popcorn, F., & Marigold, L. (2008). EVEolution: The Eight Truths of Marketing to Women. New York: Hyperion.

PT Astra Honda Motor. (2018). Project Bike 2018. Jakarta: PT Astra Honda Motor.

Qu, Q.-X., & Guo, F. (2019). Can eye movements be effectively measured to asses product design?: Gender differences should be considered. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 72, 281-289.

Silverman, I. W. (2003). Gender differences in delay of gratification: a meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 49(9), 451-463.

Szalma, J. L. (2009). Individual differences: Incorporating human variation into human factors/ergonomics research and practice. Theory Issues in Ergonomics Science, 10(5), 377-379.

Vanston, J. E., & Strother, L. (2017). Sex differences in the human visual system. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 95(1-2), 617-625.

Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. Cambridge: Academic Press.

Yang, C., & Chen, C.-S. (2014). An investigation on the gender differences of Taiwanese youths and middle ages in evaluation motorcycle appearance dan use. in KEER2014 Proceeding of the 5th International Conference on Kansei Engineering and Emotion Research. 100, pp. 405-422. Linköping: Japan Society of Kansei Engineering.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 241 times
PDF - 190 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

p-ISSN 2477-7900  |  e-ISSN 2579-7328

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Like & Follow Us