Explaining Aesthetic Judgement in Closed-Category Product Design through the Unified Model of Aesthetics and the Categorical-Motivation Model: A Laptop Product Study

Background Aesthetic design significantly influences user perception and purchasing decisions, increasingly shaping market competitiveness. However, most studies on aesthetic preference focus on decorative, open-category products and analyze isolated variables. Research remains scarce on closed-category technological products, such as laptops, where structural constraints demand a nuanced balance between function and aesthetics. This study addresses this gap by examining how multidimensional aesthetic principles interact in laptop design and by introducing a category-sensitive framework to refine current aesthetic theory. Methods We recruited 234 non-design background Chinese participants to evaluate ten laptop designs representing variations across six aesthetic dimensions. Stimuli included real and conceptually designed models, standardized in grayscale without branding to ensure unbiased visual assessment. Participants rated each design on unity, variety, typicality, novelty, connectedness, autonomy, and overall aesthetic pleasure using 7-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed with repeated-measures analysis of variance, Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE), and Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling (LMM). Results Repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant differences in aesthetic ratings across laptop designs. Typicality showed the strongest effect on preference, followed by connectedness and unity, indicating that familiarity, social attachment, and visual coherence drive aesthetic appeal in closed-category products. Novelty, autonomy and variety had weaker impacts, while gender and age no significant effect. The results of GEE confirm the UMA’s view that aesthetic pleasure comes from balancing opposing forces. Linear mixed modeling confirmed that social factors, particularly connectedness, were the most powerful predictors of aesthetic pleasure, highlighting the dominance of safety-oriented aesthetics in laptop design. Conclusion These findings suggest that product category structure may shape the relative weight of aesthetic variables. Rather than formally testing a combined structural model, this study uses the Categorical-Motivation model as a category-sensitive interpretive lens for understanding the results of the Unified Model of Aesthetics. Practically, designers should prioritize coherence, recognizability, and social alignment to enhance appeal in constrained product domains. Future research should further examine this category-sensitive interpretation across cultures, sensory modalities, and other closed-category products.