JP2018040597A - Evaluation method of cosmetics - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a method for evaluating a cosmetic not only an impression when a user uses the cosmetic but also an evaluation given by the user after using the cosmetic.SOLUTION: The evaluation method of cosmetics includes: a first evaluation step in which use feeling of a cosmetic using indices of, for example, "moisturized skin like sucking", "satisfactory moist", "satisfactory feeling after removal" etc.; a second evaluation step in which sense evaluation of the cosmetic using "want to use it continuously", "motivated to use it continuously", "comfortable" as indices; and a third step in which mathematical analyses are made on the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step, and the results thereof are visualized being associated with each other in a path diagram and/or scatter chart.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 5

Description

  The present invention relates to a cosmetic value evaluation method.

  Cosmetic evaluation is often based on human perception. For example, in patent document 1, about the fragrance which is one of the characteristics of cosmetics, it evaluates based on the "sensation rating term" evaluated based on a sensory stimulus, and the mood aroused when smelling a fragrance. A method of evaluation based on “emotion rating term” and the “preference” of the subject has been proposed. Patent Document 2 proposes a method for evaluating a cosmetic effect with respect to a feeling at the time of use, a feeling after use, and a feeling of morning after use using evaluation terms such as “bumpy feeling” and “penetration feeling”.

  These evaluation terms are selected as more appropriate evaluation terms by collecting various terms from surveys of users and organizing / scaling them using statistical methods such as factor analysis and multivariate analysis. .

JP 2001-174450 A JP 2011-38959 A

  By the way, the above-described evaluation method is a method of trying to evaluate cosmetics from the user's sense of use. However, although the value of cosmetics is judged by the user in complex with factors other than the sense of use, the method described in Patent Document 2 does not evaluate such factors other than the sense of use. In particular, when an unprecedented usage or cosmetic such as wiping skin lotion is proposed, it is desirable to evaluate in consideration of factors other than the sense of use and taste.

  Moreover, the evaluation method proposed in the above prior art document is an evaluation method for one cosmetic. That is, this is an evaluation method in the case of using only one perfume, for example, perfume for perfume, and only the latex for skin care cosmetics. However, the value of cosmetics felt by the user is not only evaluated for one cosmetic, but also evaluated in a series of actions of skin care. In a series of actions called skin care, lotion is used after washing the face, followed by multiple cosmetics in the order of cosmetic liquid, milky lotion, and cream. In recent years, it has been recommended to use a wiping lotion used for the purpose of wiping off sebum and stratum corneum after applying a face wash and before applying the lotion. In this way, in the act of skin care, two or more cosmetics may be used continuously, and the value of one cosmetic that the user feels is different from the value that is felt using only one cosmetic. There is.

  The present invention has been made in view of the background art described above, and an object thereof is to provide a method for evaluating not only the actual feeling obtained when using cosmetics but also the value of cosmetics finally felt by the user. And Another object of the present invention is to provide a method for setting development goals for cosmetics from the obtained value evaluation.

  The invention according to the present application includes a first evaluation step using an actual use feeling of a cosmetic as an evaluation index, a second evaluation step using the sensitivity value of the cosmetic as an evaluation index, and an evaluation obtained in the first evaluation step. It is a cosmetics value evaluation method having a third step of evaluating a result in association with the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, cosmetics can be evaluated not only by evaluation based on a user's feeling of use, but also by combining the mindset about the value held by the user. As a result, it is possible to grasp from what viewpoint the actual feeling felt on the skin is reflected in the psychological state that the user has for the product. In addition, if the use feeling is evaluated at several different times, the value of the cosmetics finally felt by the user can be evaluated when a plurality of cosmetics are used in series such as skin care cosmetics. As a result, when a new skin care cosmetic is put on the market, evaluation in a series of actions of skin care becomes possible. The visualized evaluation result can be used for the development and improvement of cosmetics.

FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the clustering of impression words for the actual use feeling (S1) of the wiping skin lotion. FIG. 2 is a diagram showing impression word clustering for the actual use feeling (S2) of other skin care items. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the clustering of impression words for the use feeling (S3) of the wiping lotion after continuous use. FIG. 4 is a diagram showing clustering of the value words for the sensitivity value (S4) of the wiping skin lotion. FIG. 5 shows factors of impression words about the feeling of use of wiping lotion (S1), factors of impression words about the feeling of use of other skin care items (S2), and feeling of use of wiping lotion after continuous use (S3). Is a path diagram showing the relationship between the factor of the impression word for) and the factor of the value word for the sensitivity value (S4) of the wipes lotion. FIG. 6 is a scatter diagram of factors of impression words about the feeling of use of wiping skin lotion (S1). (A) shows the relationship between factor 1 and factor 2, (B) shows the relationship between factor 1 and factor 3, and (C) shows the relationship between factor 2 and factor 3. FIG. 7 is a scatter diagram of impression word factors for the actual use feeling (S2) of another skin care item. FIG. 8 is a scatter diagram of factors of impression words regarding the use feeling (S3) of the wiping lotion after continuous use. FIG. 9 is a scatter diagram of factors of the value word for the sensitivity value (S4) of the wiping skin lotion. (A) shows the relationship between factor 1 and factor 2, (B) shows the relationship between factor 2 and factor 3, and (C) shows the relationship between factor 1 and factor 3. FIG. 10 shows evaluation results of impressions about the feeling of using the wiping lotion (S1), the feeling of using other skin care items (S2), and the feeling of using the wiping lotion after continuous use (S3). It is a path figure which shows the relationship between the factor of a value word and the factor of a value word about the sensitivity value (S4) of a wipe skin lotion. FIG. 11 shows evaluation results of impressions about the feeling of use of wiping lotion (S1), the feeling of use of other skin care items (S2), and the feeling of use of wiping lotion after continuous use (S3). It is a scatter diagram of common factors. (A) shows the relationship between the skin care effect and the wiping effect, (B) shows the relationship between the moisturizing feeling and the wiping effect, and (C) shows the relationship between the moisturizing feeling and the skin care effect. FIG. 12 shows evaluation results of the impressions about the feeling of using the wiping lotion (S1), the feeling of using other skin care items (S2), and the feeling of using the wiping lotion after continuous use (S3). It is a scatter diagram of the original factor (skin change and wiping feeling).

  The cosmetics value evaluation method according to the present invention includes a first evaluation step using the actual use feeling of the cosmetic as an evaluation index, a second evaluation step using the sensitivity value of the cosmetic as an evaluation index, and a first evaluation. A third step of evaluating the evaluation result obtained in the step in association with the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step;

[First evaluation step]
The evaluation index used in the first evaluation step is a sense of use of the cosmetic, that is, a sense (impression) obtained when the cosmetic is used. The sense of use is not only a vague or abstract feel (sensation), but also a specific viewpoint such as “skin changes”, “cosmetic paste”, and “make-up ease” It can also be a touch (sensation) focused on. Evaluation indicators include, for example, “Smooth skin”, “Moisture”, “Smooth”, “Neat”, “Smooth per skin”, “Good per touch”, “Smooth” It is indicated by a term such as “smooth” (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “impression word”).

  The impression word can be determined by a statistical method from an evaluation based on free description when using cosmetics. Statistical methods are, for example, goodness-of-fit tests that determine whether an impression word is appropriate, similarity tests that determine whether free-written terms are similar, and how far the free-written terms have an impression This is a distance measurement test (experiment) to determine whether or not. The goodness-of-fit test is a test in which whether or not a freely described term is suitable as an impression word is evaluated step by step by the examinee and selected from those having a high evaluation. The similarity test is a test in which it is determined whether or not the same impression can be expressed between two terms, and a selection is made based on a rate evaluated that the same impression can be expressed. The distance measurement test is a test that expresses how far the two terms are psychologically separated by numbers. The distance between two terms is determined from the evaluation points obtained for all the terms in question. The distances that can be used for the test are, for example, the Euclidean distance, the Mahalanobis distance, and the Manhattan distance, but are not limited to these distances. Term selection criteria can be determined as appropriate, and examples include a method of selecting two terms that are separated from each other, or selecting several terms so that they are approximately equally spaced.

  The impression word used for the evaluation is determined by one or a combination of two or more of these statistical methods. The number of impression words is determined as appropriate so that a meaningful evaluation can be obtained. For example, the number of impression words is 4, 6, 6, 8, and 10. Moreover, it is preferable to set so that the feeling of use felt from the impression word is not biased. For this purpose, for example, a method of further classifying the results of the fitness test, similarity test, and distance measurement test by cluster classification, principal component analysis, etc., and selecting two or three words for each classified category is also exemplified. The However, the selection of impression words is not limited to these statistical methods, and impression words that are felt empirically or impression words that are predicted may be used. On the other hand, when determining an impression word, it is possible to have a free description from a specific point of view, determine an impression word by the statistical method, or narrow down a term obtained by free description from a specific point of view. For example, instead of a vague or abstract feeling of use, there is a method of determining from a free description that focuses on a specific viewpoint such as a cosmetic effect such as “skin change” as described above. By introducing a viewpoint from a specific viewpoint, a more detailed examination can be performed.

  In the first evaluation step, an evaluation test of a cosmetic to be tested is performed based on the determined impression word. The evaluation test is a test for scoring whether or not the determined impression word is felt as a real feeling from the cosmetics to be evaluated. For example, scoring is performed in seven stages, and if it corresponds to an impression word, 7 points that are the highest points are given, and if it does not correspond at all, one point that is the lowest point is given. The evaluation class may not be 7 levels, and may be 5 levels or 3 levels. However, if there are few evaluation classes as in 3 levels, there is a possibility that evaluation between cosmetics cannot be performed. The score obtained here is used as an evaluation result in the third step.

  A cosmetic to be evaluated in one test may be one cosmetic or a plurality of similar cosmetics. Here, the same-type cosmetics refer to cosmetics that have equivalent uses and functions and that can be compared with each other. For example, a plurality of emulsions with different prescriptions for milky lotions and a plurality of lotions with different prescriptions for skin lotions are evaluated. In consideration of using the evaluation result for prescription design, it is preferable to use a plurality of cosmetics having different prescriptions. The cosmetic to be evaluated is not particularly limited as long as it is a cosmetic that provides a feeling of use when used. For example, wiping lotion with the purpose of wiping off sebum and stratum corneum, and lotion, essence, milky lotion, cream, etc. with the purpose of mainly moisturizing the skin without having the purpose of wiping off sebum and stratum corneum It can be a hair care product such as skin care, tonic, base makeup such as foundation, and point makeup such as lipstick.

  In the first evaluation step, it is preferable to use a plurality of evaluation periods. Here, the time of evaluation refers to the time of judging the actual use. By using multiple evaluation periods, it is possible to grasp in detail the relationship between the value felt by the user and the actual use of the cosmetic, and the value of the cosmetic can be evaluated in more detail. In addition, the amount of information that serves as a guideline for prescription design increases. However, even if the evaluation is made at multiple times, the data obtained at all times or the data obtained at several times are aggregated and one or more evaluation results are calculated. There is no problem.

  The timing of evaluation is determined in relation to the use of cosmetics, and the type of cosmetics used and the purpose of testing are taken into account. For example, in the case of evaluating a single use, the time of evaluation is, for example, “after using cosmetics”, “in use of cosmetics”, and “in use or after use of cosmetics”. , “The next morning after use”. In addition, in the case of evaluation for continuous use, the time of evaluation is, for example, “the number of days after the start of use” or “continuous use”. It may also be at the end of the evaluation period, such as “after use”. And the evaluation time in single use and the evaluation time on the premise of continuous use can also be combined suitably. The scoring based on the impression word may be performed at every evaluation time or after the evaluation period is over.

  Moreover, when using different types of cosmetics as a series of actions, such as skin care, it is preferable to evaluate each type of cosmetic when used. In skin care, after removing the stratum corneum and sebum using wiping lotion after washing the face, applying lotion, and then applying beauty liquid, milky lotion, and even cream, etc. Cosmetics may be used sequentially. In this case, the value of the wipe skin lotion may be influenced by other skin care items. Therefore, it can be evaluated for each use time of different types of cosmetics. For example, when three types of cosmetics are used in one care, the actual feeling when using the first cosmetic (e.g., wiping lotion) to be evaluated, followed by the second cosmetic ( For example, the use feeling of the second cosmetic material when using a milky lotion, and the use feeling of the first cosmetic material when using a third cosmetic material (for example, cream) to be used subsequently are evaluated. May be. One-time care is not a term used exclusively for skin care, for example, use of skin care and subsequent make-up cosmetics, use of shaving cream and after-shave lotion after shaving, use of hair tonic And hair liquid use, hair shampoo use, hair rinse after hair washing and use of hair conditioner, and the like, it means actions that two or more different types of cosmetics are supposed to be used almost continuously. In the evaluation method of the present invention, the evaluation may be performed in one care, or may be evaluated in care performed continuously several times. The evaluation method of the present invention can also be applied to the case where the value of the second cosmetic is evaluated after using the first cosmetic. In this case, what is necessary is just to evaluate the use feeling after using the 2nd cosmetics, without evaluating the use feeling at the time of use of the 1st cosmetics.

[Second evaluation step]
The evaluation index used in the second evaluation step is the sensitivity value of the cosmetic. Sensitivity value is the value that manifests by acting on the user's sensibility and gaining emotion and empathy. This is not an impression that is felt as a feeling of use, but an index that represents the sensitivity to the cosmetics recognized by using the cosmetics. It is noted that this evaluation index is not an evaluation index felt when using cosmetics performed in the first evaluation step, but an index that is comprehensively determined after the end of the evaluation period in the first evaluation step. Should. The evaluation index is, for example, terms such as “want to use for a long time”, “motivated to continue to use”, “comfortable”, “no burden on skin”, “effective in wiping” (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “value word”). Indicated.

  These value words can be determined by a statistical method from evaluation based on free description when cosmetics are used. The statistical method is the same method as determining an impression word in the first evaluation step. For example, a fitness test, a similarity test, and a distance measurement test. The value word used for the evaluation is determined by one or a combination of two or more of these statistical methods, but the selection of the value word is not limited to these statistical methods. Also, the number of value words is appropriately determined so that a meaningful evaluation can be obtained, and may be 4, 6, 6, 8, or 10, for example. Moreover, it is preferable to set so that the sensitivity of the value word is not biased. Since the value word can be determined from the comprehensively judged evaluation left to the free description as described above, it may include an evaluation index close to a sense of use.

  In the second evaluation step, an evaluation test of the cosmetic to be tested is performed based on the determined value word. The evaluation test is a test for scoring whether or not the determined value word is felt as a sensitivity value from the target cosmetic. For example, scoring is performed in 7 stages, and if it falls under the value word, 7 points are assigned as the highest score, and if it does not correspond at all, 1 point is assigned as the lowest score. The evaluation class does not have to be 7 levels, and may be 5 levels or 3 levels, but if it is as small as 3 levels, there is a possibility that evaluation between cosmetics cannot be performed. The score obtained here is used as an evaluation result in the third step.

[Third step]
The third step is a step of evaluating the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step in association with the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step. Assessing in association means whether there is any correlation (positive correlation, negative correlation, etc.) between the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step. Or how much correlation there is, and whether or not there is a causal relationship. The method of associating is preferably exemplified by a method using a mathematical analysis means such as multivariate analysis. Also, the association is preferably visualized. A method for visualizing the both in association with each other is not particularly limited, and for example, a method for visualizing as a path diagram or a scatter diagram is shown. Moreover, you may evaluate by only visualizing an evaluation result as a graph or a table | surface, respectively, without using a mathematical means.

  The path diagram is created by, for example, covariance structure analysis (SEM). A method of creating a path diagram is well known, and any method may be used. In SEM, the evaluation result (score) obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result (score) obtained in the second evaluation step are used as they are, or the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step. And a method of performing factor analysis on the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step and using the obtained factor score data. Several models are referenced for creation, and a path diagram with good model fitness is selected. In the path diagram, the factor extracted from the evaluation result of the first evaluation step and the factor extracted from the evaluation result of the second evaluation step are preferably displayed in association with each other.

  The scatter diagram is a diagram showing the relationship between factors in a multidimensional manner. A method for creating a scatter diagram is also known, and any method may be used. The scatter diagram between the factors extracted from the evaluation result of the first evaluation step and the scatter diagram between the factors extracted from the evaluation result of the second evaluation step are preferably drawn with two axes in the two-dimensional space. When evaluating cosmetics of a plurality of items, the scatter diagram shows the evaluation results for each evaluated cosmetic. In creating a scatter diagram, the evaluation result (score) obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result (score) obtained in the second evaluation step can be used as they are, or obtained in the first evaluation step. There is a method using factor score data obtained by factor analysis of the obtained evaluation result and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step. In the scatter diagram, it is possible to visually compare which factor, which has a high user's value evaluation, has a large influence on the first evaluation step and which factor has a large influence on the second evaluation step.

  In the third step, when the first evaluation step is performed at a plurality of evaluation periods, it is desirable that the factors are indicated for each evaluation period. In this case, the path diagram shows a hierarchy corresponding to the time of evaluation. In the first evaluation step, factors may be extracted by calculating an evaluation result by collecting a plurality of evaluation periods. You can also draw an optimal path diagram while looking at the interrelationships of factors. For example, based on the impression received from the impression word or value word that constitutes the extracted factor, a path diagram or a scatter diagram may be drawn after correcting the factor to which the impression word or value word belongs. .

  Next, the present invention will be specifically described in detail based on the following examples. However, the present invention is not limited to the following examples.

[Selection / setting of impression words / evaluation words]
(preliminary survey)
Prior to the evaluation of cosmetics, impression words and value words, which are evaluation indexes used at the time of evaluation, were selected and set. First, as a preliminary survey, the skincare items that are usually used by each paneler for 18 female panelists (23 to 57 years old) who regularly use the skincare items as a skincare item. And asked the panelists themselves to make free descriptive evaluations from the following four viewpoints. That is, use feeling (use feeling) (viewpoint S1) felt when using wiping lotion, use feeling of skin care items when using other skin care items after using wiping lotion (viewpoint S1) Viewpoint S2), actual use feeling of wiping cosmetics felt after continuous use of wiping lotion and skin care items (here we focused on “skin changes”) (viewpoint S3) and wiping lotion felt after the end of the evaluation period Each of the sensibility values (viewpoint S4) was evaluated freely. Wipe lotion lotion was 4 items, and the period was 12 days, 3 days for each item. Other skin care items are cosmetics arbitrarily selected by each panelist, and they are cosmetics called skin lotion, cosmetic liquid, milky lotion, and cream. As a result, when the impression words and value words with the same meaning are arranged, as shown in Table 1, from the feeling of using the wipes cosmetics (viewpoint S1), the impression words of 95 words are the feeling of using other skin items. From (viewpoint S2), 40 impression words are used, and after use, the actual feeling of use of the wiping cosmetics (skin change) From 33 (viewpoint S3), the impression words of 33 words are the sensitivity value of the wiping cosmetics (viewpoint S4) Then 71 value words were found.

(Evaluation word setting)
From the impression words and value words obtained from free descriptions, impression words and value words suitable for expressing the wiping lotion were selected and set.

  A similar survey was conducted on 17 panelists who participated in the preliminary survey. In this survey, the same cosmetics as in the previous survey were used. The period was 12 days for 3 days of morning and evening use per wipe lotion. Evaluation is appropriate as an evaluation word that represents the actual feeling or sensitivity value of impression words (S1: 95 words, S2: 40 words, S3: 33 words) and value words (S4: 71 words) obtained by the preliminary survey. 7 stages (1. Not very suitable 2. Not suitable 3. Not suitable 3. Not suitable 4. Not suitable 5. Suitable slightly 6. Suitable 6. Very suitable )). Thereafter, impression words and value words having a high evaluation average score and a small standard deviation were selected. As a result, 33 words were selected for viewpoint S1, 15 words for viewpoint S2, 12 words for viewpoint S3, and 25 words for viewpoint S4. Table 2 shows the selected impression words and value words.

  In addition, systematic selection was made from the selected impression words and value words as the evaluation index for the value evaluation of the wipes. For systematic selection, after calculating the similarity between the impression words and between the value words, the value word representing the impression value group representing the sense of use of each of the viewpoints S1 to S3 and the sensitivity value of the viewpoint S4 Cluster analysis was performed on the group.

The same survey as the selection of impression words / value words was conducted on 17 panelists involved in the selection of impression words and value words. The evaluation is performed for the selected impression words (S1: 33 words, S2: 15 words, S3: 12 words) and the value words (S4: 25 words) in the viewpoints S1 to S4 (impression words or value words). ) Can be expressed in two stages whether it can be expressed by other evaluation words (impression words or evaluation words) shown in the respective viewpoints S1 to S4. That is, for each viewpoint, all evaluation words were evaluated for whether one impression word can be replaced with another impression word or one value word can be replaced with another value word. When a rate at which a certain evaluation word i can be expressed by another evaluation word j is a matching rate r _ij (a matching rate for the i-th listed evaluation word), the similarity R _i of the evaluation word _i is: As a vector of the coincidence rate r _ij , R _i = (r _i1 , r _i2 ,..., R _in ) is expressed. However, n is the number of words in each of the impression word group representing the sense of use of each of the viewpoints S1 to S3 and the value word group representing the sensitivity value of the viewpoint S4, that is, 33 in S1.

Hierarchical cluster analysis using the square Euclidean distance by the Ward method was performed using R _i obtained here, and classified hierarchically. From the obtained hierarchical structure, the number of clusters was determined on the basis of classifying the cluster at the point with the longest distance between the hierarchies. The results of cluster analysis are shown in FIGS. The numbers in the table correspond to the numbers attached to the terms shown in Table 2. As a result, the number of clusters at the viewpoint S1 is 3. As a result of the same analysis for other scenes, the number of clusters at the viewpoint S2 is 2, the number of clusters at the viewpoint S3 is 2, and the number of clusters at the viewpoint S4 is 3.

Next, representative words used for evaluation were selected from the evaluation words in each cluster. As the representative words, two evaluation words having the smallest difference between the center of the similarity and the similarity of each evaluation word are selected in each cluster so as to be close to the evaluation word including the meaning space of each cluster. The similarity center C in a certain cluster is expressed by the following Equation 1. In Equation 1, m represents an evaluation word belonging to each cluster, and the total number thereof is M (M = 13 in cluster 1 in viewpoint S1). n indicates the number of dimensions (the same as the number of evaluation words in each viewpoint: n = 33 in the viewpoint S1). Also, the similarity difference D _i between the evaluation word i and the center C of the similarity is expressed by the following formula 2 using the similarity R _i .

Further, the principal component analysis is performed on the similarity Ri of the evaluation words in each cluster, and the evaluation word (two words in total) in which the principal component score of the first principal component axis (Z1) becomes the maximum value and the minimum value, Evaluation words (two words in total) having the maximum and minimum principal component scores on the two principal component axes (Z2) were selected. Since the principal component analysis cannot be applied when there are few evaluation words in each cluster, three words are selected from those having the smallest difference D _i between the similarity center C and the similarity R _i of each evaluation word i. did. The selection results are shown in Tables 3 to 6. Using the evaluation word selected by these methods as an evaluation index, it was decided to evaluate the wipe lotion at each of the viewpoints S1 to S4.

[Evaluation test of wiping skin lotion]
We evaluated the value of wiping lotion for those who have not used it. We had you evaluate based on evaluation word set above. The test subject was a non-wiping skin toner user and a woman (30 to 49 years old) who used one or more items of skin care cosmetics such as milky lotion and cream in addition to the facial cleanser and skin lotion.

  Each subject was asked to use one of the four types of wiping lotions, and skin care items other than wiping lotions were used as usual. The period was one month for morning and evening use. The evaluation was performed on the impression words (S1: 18 words, S2: 11 words, S3: 9 words) and the value words (S4: 15 words) selected above, with a seven-level evaluation (7 is the most applicable, 1 is not exactly applicable) Not).

  Factor analysis by maximum likelihood method and promax rotation was performed on the obtained evaluation results. At this time, on the basis that the eigenvalue is 1.0 or more, an evaluation word having a factor loading of less than 0.40 is excluded from the analysis target, and the factor analysis is performed again. Tables 7 to 10 show factor loadings for each viewpoint obtained by factor analysis. Three factors were extracted from the viewpoint S1, two factors were extracted from the viewpoint S2, one factor was extracted from the viewpoint S3, and three factors were extracted from the viewpoint S4, and a factor name that comprehensively represents each factor was assigned. The factor names are given names that symbolize the evaluation words belonging to the factor, with an evaluation word having a high factor loading among the evaluation words belonging to each factor.

(Create a path diagram)
Furthermore, analysis by covariance structure analysis (SEM) using factor score data as observation variables was performed. Several models were tried, and finally a path diagram with good model fit was obtained. The path diagram is shown in FIG. Pass coefficient is significant at 5% level from "wiping feeling" to "moisturizing feeling", from "wiping feeling" to "comfortable feeling", "feeling after wiping", "component feeling", and "skin change" to "component feeling" From “wiping feeling” to “wiping feeling”, “moisturizing feeling” to “component feeling” were significant at the 1% level, and the remaining pass coefficients were all significant at the 0.1% level.

(Create a scatter diagram)
Next, the four types of wiping lotion used in the evaluation were mapped with the average value of the factor scores of each wiping lotion with the factors at each of the viewpoints S1 to S4 as two axes in the two-dimensional space. The results are shown in FIGS.

(Validity of evaluation method)
As a result of factor analysis, from the viewpoint of the actual feeling (S1) of the use of the wiping lotion in Table 7, the wiping feeling of the “wiping feeling” (first factor) and the “feel after wiping” (third factor) is evaluated. The factors can be summarized by words, and the evaluation at the viewpoint S1 is considered appropriate. From the viewpoint of the actual feeling of use of other skin care items in Table 8 (S2), "Moisturizing feeling" (first factor) "Moisturizing feeling""Moisteningfeeling""Moisteningfeeling","Smoothfeeling", etc. "(Second factor)" can be put together with words that evaluate skin care items used in combination, and the evaluation at the viewpoint S2 is also considered appropriate. From the viewpoint of the feeling of use of the wipes lotion after continuous use in Table 9 (S3), the factors can be summarized by the impression obtained after long-term use of “skin change” (first factor). It is considered reasonable. From the viewpoint of the sensibility value (S4) of the wiping skin lotion in Table 10, “comfortable” (first factor) such as “comfortable” “good skin feel”, “comfortable wiping feel”, “dirty feeling” “Which motivation” (2nd factor) is a mixture of the sense of wiping and the word “motivation to continue to use” and “motivation to continue to use”. It was compiled as “component feeling” (third factor) including the word “I felt change”. In the viewpoint S4, value words that are not expressed in the sense of use are included, and it is considered that the determination as the value of the wiping lotion is obtained. Therefore, the evaluation at the viewpoint S4 is considered to be appropriate.

  Next, in the path diagram of FIG. 5, many paths extend from the first factor “wiping feeling” at the viewpoint of S1 to the factors at the other viewpoints. In particular, “wiping motivation” confirmed two routes that reached indirectly through a direct path and a “smooth feeling” showing strong causality. Since “smoothness” is also related to “comfort” and “component feeling” through “skin changes”, “wiping feeling” is confirmed to be an extremely important factor for moisturizing lotions. Each of the four cosmetics tested is evaluated as having significance as a wipe lotion. In addition, the “feeling after wiping” was confirmed to be a direct path to “feeling of ingredients” and two routes that reach indirectly through “skin changes”. This is thought to be because the “feel after wiping” makes the skin change due to the active ingredient of the wiping skin lotion. In this way, it has been reconfirmed that wiping lotion, which is a special preparation for cosmetics, is a product that gives new value to users.

(Application to product design)
The four types of wipe lotions used in the evaluation so far have different prescription characteristics. According to this, in the viewpoint S4, the wiping lotion 2 has the highest evaluation of all three factors (see FIG. 9). From this, it is understood that the wiping lotion 2 is a wiping lotion with a high value evaluation by the user. From this, the low-evaluation wipe lotion 3 or 4 may be devised so as to be close to the wipe lotion 2. For example, the wiping lotion 3 has an evaluation similar to “comfort”, but has a weak wiping motivation. For this reason, a prescription design that increases “motivation to wipe” is required. Looking at this from each viewpoint, it was speculated that in the viewpoint S1 in FIG. 6, the wiping lotion 3 had a high “wiping feeling” from the content of the prescription, but in the actual evaluation, it was low and constituted the factor “wiping feeling”. It is assumed that this is because the influence of the evaluation word “easy to wipe” is large (see Table 7). Therefore, it is desired to change the prescription to improve the “easy wipe”.

  Further, in the mapping of “motivation for wiping” in the viewpoint S4 (FIGS. 9A and 9B), the wiping lotion 1 was a reasonable evaluation. In the SEM analysis (Fig. 5), "motivation to wipe" shows the causal relationship between the two factors of "wiping feeling" in viewpoint S1 and "smooth feeling" in S2, but looking at these mappings, The lotion 1 has a low evaluation in all factors. From this result, it can be inferred that in the wipe lotion 1, elements other than the “wipe feel” and “smooth feeling” symbolizing the feeling of use enhance the value of the wipe lotion 1.

  Thus, by evaluating the selected item, it is possible to grasp the relationship between the sensitivity value determined by the user and the feeling of use. And by analyzing them, it can be used for prescription design of new cosmetics.

  About the evaluation result for the unused user of the wipe lotion obtained in Example 1, the use feelings of the viewpoints S1 to S3 were summarized and the same evaluation was performed. In other words, since the evaluations from viewpoint S1 to viewpoint S3 are impressions when using a wipe lotion, these are regarded as one evaluation item, and impression evaluation at the time of use and value evaluation as a new product. We evaluated the value of wiping lotion from the viewpoint. A total of 38 words including 18 evaluation words in S1, 11 evaluation words in S2, and 9 evaluation words in S3 were combined and subjected to factor analysis by maximum likelihood method and promax rotation in the same manner as in Example 1. As a result, five factors shown in Table 11 were extracted. Further, the path diagram shown in FIG. 10 and the scatter diagrams shown in FIGS. 11 and 12 were obtained from these factors. The scatter diagram at the viewpoint S4 is the same as FIG.

  As a result of factor analysis of the evaluation words in the viewpoints S1 to S3, the impression word group information to which each impression word belongs as shown in Table 12 is divided into a factor that includes a plurality of viewpoints and a factor in a single viewpoint. It was. Factors that include a plurality of viewpoints include a factor (Gr1) that includes viewpoints S1 and S2, a factor (Gr2) that includes viewpoints S1 to S3, and a factor (Gr3) that includes viewpoints S1 and S3. The factor (Gr4) that includes the viewpoints S2 and S3, and the single factor is the factor (Gr5) that is the single point of view S1. The factor (Gr1) that includes viewpoints S1 and S2 is “moisturizing”, the factor (Gr2) that includes viewpoints S1 to S3 is “skin care effect”, and the factor (Gr3) that includes viewpoints S1 and S3 is “ The “wiping effect”, the factor (Gr4) including the viewpoints S2 and S3 are summarized as “skin change”, and the single factor (Gr5) at the viewpoint S1 is summarized as a word expressing “wiping feeling”. Here, the “wiping effect” is summarized as a factor that includes the viewpoint S1 and the viewpoint S3. The evaluation of “transparent” and “no dullness” included here is the impression that the word has. It was thought that it should be evaluated by the impression obtained from the above, and was corrected as a factor common to the viewpoints S1 to S3. Also, an impression word common to each viewpoint is treated as an impression word representing one of the viewpoints. For example, an impression word “smooth” belonging to the factor “skin change” (impression word group of viewpoint S2, impression word group of S3) Is also treated as an impression word belonging to the viewpoint S3. If treated as such, the “moisturizing sensation”, “skin care effect”, and “wiping effect” are derived from factors that include multiple viewpoints (common factors), that is, the combination of the wipe skin lotion and skin care items. The impression word (impression word) included in each factor matches the impression. The other “skin changes (Gr4)” and “wiping feel (Gr5)” are derived from factors (original factors) that are grouped in each impression word group, and the evaluation words ( It matches the impression represented by (impression word).

  Next, a path diagram (FIG. 10) was created based on the factors (Gr1 to 5) corrected above. Here, a factor that includes multiple viewpoints (common factor) is represented by a size that crosses between multiple viewpoints. From this path diagram, it was found that the “wiping feeling” that is a single factor at the viewpoint S1 shows a high correlation with the “skin care effect”, “moisturizing feeling”, and “wiping effect” including elements at the same viewpoint S1. Moreover, it turned out that both a common factor and an original factor show a causal relationship with 3 factors in viewpoint S4. Therefore, in order to increase the sensitivity value of the wiping skin lotion, it is considered necessary to consider both factors common to normal skin care items and factors unique to wiping skin lotion.

  Scatter plots were drawn based on the three factors of “moisturizing feeling”, “skin care effect” and “wiping effect”, which are common factors, and two factors of “skin change” and “wiping feeling”, which are unique factors. From FIG. 11, since the moisturizing skin lotion 2 is inferior in moisturizing feeling as a skin care item compared to the moisturizing skin lotion 4, it is possible to further improve the sensitivity value of the viewpoint S4 by designing this moisturizing feeling. It was judged that there was a possibility. Similarly, as shown in FIG. 12, wiping lotion 4 has a prescription design that enhances the wiping feeling, thereby affecting the highly correlated “skin care effect”, “moisturizing feeling”, and “wiping effect”. As a result, the sensitivity value of viewpoint S4 It was judged that there is a possibility of further improvement.

  Thus, as in Example 1, the relationship between the impression evaluation during use and the sensitivity value as a product can be a guideline for changing the prescription for obtaining the desired product value. In the future evaluation, the evaluation word (impression word / value word) determined in the first embodiment may be performed, or the evaluation word may be determined based on the user's free description. Needless to say.

  INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY The present invention can be used for prescription design that makes it possible to know the relationship between an actual use feeling (impression) and a comprehensive value judgment, and to approximate the sensitivity value recognized by the user.

Claims (10)

A first evaluation step using an actual use feeling of cosmetics as an evaluation index;
A second evaluation step using the sensitivity value of the cosmetic as an evaluation index;
A cosmetic value evaluation method having a third step of evaluating the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step in association with each other. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 1,
The third step is a cosmetic value evaluation method in which a path diagram is created from the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 1,
The third step is a cosmetic value evaluation method, which is a step of creating a scatter diagram from the evaluation result obtained in the first evaluation step and the evaluation result obtained in the second evaluation step. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 3,
The first evaluation step is a cosmetic value evaluation method comprising a plurality of evaluation steps at different times. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 4,
The first evaluation step is “after use of the first cosmetic material in one care” “after using the second cosmetic material after use of the first cosmetic material in one care” “first cosmetic material” And a method for evaluating the value of cosmetics, which is a step of evaluating after “care for continuously using the second cosmetics”. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 5,
The first cosmetic is a wipe lotion;
The second cosmetic is a method for evaluating the value of a cosmetic that is a skin care item other than a wipe lotion. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 6,
A cosmetic value evaluation method using the first cosmetic as an object of value evaluation. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to any one of claims 4 to 7,
The second evaluation step is a cosmetic value evaluation method performed after the evaluation of the first evaluation step is completed. In the cosmetics value evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 8,
The evaluation index of the first step is a cosmetic value evaluation method including a feeling of use focusing on a specific viewpoint. A method for designing cosmetics,
Preparing a plurality of cosmetics with different prescriptions;
For all the prepared cosmetics, obtaining a path diagram using the cosmetics value evaluation method according to claim 2;
For all the prepared cosmetics, obtaining a scatter diagram using the cosmetic value evaluation method according to claim 3,
A cosmetic design method including a step of correcting the prescription of at least one cosmetic by referring to the obtained path diagram and scatter diagram.

Images