ED (Emotional Design) Score is a method to help communicating feedback and discussing improvement better with clear actionable items. It's not just about UX & Design, but also about business, technology, and brand.

1. ED SCORE
Borrys Hasian
Emotional Design Score
Head of UX & Design, Rakuten Viki
@borryshasian
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2. PROBLEMS
No clear approach in
communicating why a product is
bad and frustrating.
No structured method to compare
our own product with competitors’
product.
Unclear actionable items to
improve the experience.

3. In what ways might we design a
method that helps people
communicate feedback better with
clear actionable items?
In what ways might we design a
method that helps people discuss
experience improvement ideas better
with clear actionable items?
CHALLENGES

4. ED Score
Communicate feedback and discuss
improvement better with clear actionable
items.
Version Notes Date Author
0.1 Initial Draft Jan 6, 2016 Borrys Hasian

5. INSPIRATIONS
Don Norman’s three
levels of processing:
Visceral, Behavioral, and
Reflective.
Dieter Rams’s Ten
Principles of Good
Design.
Tom Kelley’s
Creative
Confidence
Jon Maeda’s Laws
of Simplicity
Alan Cooper’s Goal-
Directed Design

6. Reflective
Behavioral
Visceral
Self-image, personal
satisfaction, memories
Appearance, touch, and
feel
Function, performance,
usability, and simplicity.
THREE LEVELS OF
PROCESSING IN
THE BRAIN

7. 10 Principles of Good Design
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective
Behavioral
Visceral

8. 10 Principles of Good Design
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective
Behavioral
Visceral

9. 10 Principles of Good Design
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective
Behavioral
Visceral

10. 10 Principles of Good Design
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective
Behavioral
Visceral

11. ED (Emotional Design) Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound,
smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the
goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.

12. ED (Emotional Design) Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound,
smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the
goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.

13. ED (Emotional Design) Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound,
smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the
goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.

14. ED (Emotional Design) Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound,
smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the
goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
Good design is aesthetic.
Good design is unobtrusive.
Good design is long-lasting.
Good design makes a product understandable.
Good design makes a product useful.
Good design is innovative.
Good design is thorough down to the last detail.
Good design is as little design as possible.
Good design is honest.
Good design is environmentally friendly.

15. eral
ioral
ctive
ED Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
1. I think the product looks good.
2. I found that the product was easy to learn.
3. I could achieve my goals easily.
4. I found the features of the product satisfy my
needs.
5. I found that the product is troublesome to use.
6. I felt that the performance of the product is
good.
7. I felt that the product is complicated.
8. I felt good when using the product.
9. I think I would use the product again in the
future.
10. I would recommend the product to my
friends/family.

16. eral
ioral
ctive
ED Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
1. I think the product looks good.
2. I found that the product was easy to learn.
3. I could achieve my goals easily.
4. I found the features of the product satisfy my
needs.
5. I found that the product is troublesome to use.
6. I felt that the performance of the product is
good.
7. I felt that the product is complicated.
8. I felt good when using the product.
9. I think I would use the product again in the
future.
10. I would recommend the product to my
friends/family.

17. eral
ioral
ctive
ED Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
1. I think the product looks good.
2. I found that the product was easy to learn.
3. I could achieve my goals easily.
4. I found the features of the product satisfy my
needs.
5. I found that the product is troublesome to use.
6. I felt that the performance of the product is
good.
7. I felt that the product is complicated.
8. I felt good when using the product.
9. I think I would use the product again in the
future.
10. I would recommend the product to my
friends/family.

18. eral
ioral
ctive
ED Scale
Users' subjective reactions to the
product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any).
The ability of users to achieve the goals.
Level of resource/effort consumed
when doing tasks to achieve goals.
Less but better. Focusing on the
essential aspects that matter to the
users.
Users' subjective satisfaction or
memory with the product.
1. I think the product looks good.
2. I found that the product was easy to learn.
3. I could achieve my goals easily.
4. I found the features of the product satisfy my
needs.
5. I found that the product is troublesome to use.
6. I felt that the performance of the product is
good.
7. I felt that the product is complicated.
8. I felt good when using the product.
9. I think I would use the product again in the
future.
10. I would recommend the product to my
friends/family.

19. ED SCALE
Strongly
disagree
Strongly
agree
1 2 3 4 5
1. I think the product looks good.
2. I found that the product was easy to learn.
3. I could achieve my goals easily.
4. I found the features of the product satisfy my
needs.
5. I found that the product is troublesome to use.
6. I felt that the performance of the product is
good.
7. I felt that the product is complicated.
8. I felt good when using the product.
9. I think I would use the product again in the
future.
10. I would recommend the product to my
friends/family.

20. For 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,10
Temp Score = Scale -1
ED Score Calculation
For 5, 7
Temp Score = 5 - Scale
ED Score = Sum of Temp
Score x 2.5

21. Example of use

22. Scenario
You have an existing mobile app and
want to improve the overall app
experience.

23. 3 Steps to Start
1. Get at least 2 people (including you) to score
your app/web/product/service/feature/etc.
You can also score competitor’s product as a
reference.
2. Ask ‘WHY’ for any score gap, and refer to the
10 Principles of Good Design.
3. Set the next actionable items to close the
gap.

24. Step 1: ED Scoring of a mobile app by
Designer vs Product Manager
Designer’s scoring Product Manager’s scoring

25. The score is not the
main focus. It’s the
WHY to the gap.
“Why did you put 2
on ‘... product looks
good’?”
“Why did you put 3
on ‘... troublesome
to use’?”
Step 2: Asking WHY

26. Refer to the 10 Principles of Good Design to
set the next actionable items based on the
experience gap.
Step 3: Actionable Items

27. UX Design has a lot of different
methods/metrics to measure its
success, so you need to find what
works/doesn’t work for the team.
Try ED Scoring method to see if it
works for you.
Come up with your own method
based on the ED Score, and share
with us.
WHAT’S NEXT?

28. ● A checklist for actionable items
(that maps to Ram’s principles).
● Each of the criterias from ED
Scale could have different
weight (e.g Performance is 15%
and Look is 5%, where the rest
are 10%).
● Etc.
FUTURE PLAN.
To be added to
the slides later.

29. Empathy. Experiment.
Build ideas on top of
others’.
Tom Kelley’s Creative Confidence

30. Thank You. ありがとうございました. Gracias. 谢谢. Merci. Terima kasih. Obrigado
Borrys Hasian
@borryshasian
Special thanks to Teo Choong Ching (@choongchingteo)
and Esther (@estherfanll) from Rakuten Viki Design (RVD
Twitter / RVD Facebook Page) for giving feedback on
version 0.1
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.