September 27

After reading the prologue to Donald Norman’s book Emotional Design a few points caught my interest. One of the key points that Norman makes in this opening prologue is “without emotions, your decision-making ability would be impaired”, meaning that our everyday decision-making processes are largely influenced by our emotions. I found the reference to neuroscientist Antonio Damasio’s work both relevant and interesting. Damasio’s patients had suffered brain injuries that impaired their emotional systems, thus impairing their decision-making ability especially in situations where the alternatives were equal. Norman also makes the point that cognition allows you to interpret and understand the world around you, but “emotions allow you to make quick decisions about it.” I found this point interesting because it connects to another writer’s work, that being Malcolm Gladwell, author of The Tipping Point and more recently, Blink. In Blink, Gladwell writes about how decisions that are made almost instinctively, spur-of-the-moment, emotionally based are often correct, as compared to other decisions that are sometimes more drawn out and based on other types of information.
I also found Norman’s contention that “aesthetically pleasing objects enable you to work better” rather interesting. Some people make purchase decisions based not necessarily on whether or not an particular item meets certain design specifications but whether it looks “cool”. He points to the popularity of the BMW Mini Cooper S, featured in the movie The Italian Job, as being a vehicle that provoked a lot of smiles, but may be lacking in some dynamic attributes. As the New York Times reviewer put it, the car is so much fun to look at and drive that the reviewer suggested potential buyers overlook its faults.
For whatever reason, this train of thought leads me to think of those PC and Mac TV commercials. You know the ones featuring these two fellows:




It seems to me that these ads are targeting the viewers’ emotions. Many people have been frustrated with a PC, and how it’s not maybe as user-friendly as a Mac can be. I know that I’ve cursed a few times at my own PC, for not being more intuitive (and I consider myself to be fairly computer-savvy). I have to admit certain things about these ads appeal to me. I think that they are clever. Will these ads convince me to buy a Mac? Maybe not. I think my next computer might in fact be a Mac, but only because of the ability to run both Windows and Mac environments. I guess when it comes to big purchases, the technical-cognitive part of my brain still kicks in and I want to make technical comparisons between the two. Or maybe that’s what I’m telling myself and my emotions are affecting cognitive system. Still, you’ve got to laugh at these commercials. Here’s another opinion on these TV spots from Seth Stevenson at Slate: Mac Attack.
On another note, I had a chance to peruse Nielsen’s Usability 101: Introduction to Usability as well today. I found it to be a very straightforward read, clearly outlining the quality components that define usability (learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors and satisfaction), why usability is important, and how to improve usability. All of these pieces of advice are very clear and useful bits of information that we will no doubt refer to when designing our projects.

After reading Chapter 2 in Norman’s Emotional Design, one thing seems to leap out at me, and that was the part where Norman discussed Alice Isen’s experiments regarding increasing people’s happiness, and how being happy broadens the thought process and facilitates creative thinking. By making people happy with a small “gift” it encourages “out of the box” thinking, making people better at brainstorming, and other creative outlets. Again this triggered something in me, as I remembered this photo essay that Time Magazine did on work life at Google. I thought that I would share some of the pictures from that photo essay here. (These photos appeared in the February 16, 2006 issue of Time, here is a hyperlink to the entire photo essay)

There seems to be a pretty laid back attitude at Google. This fellow’s workstation appears pretty cluttered with lots of gizmos.


Two employees break for coffee beside the “idea board,” a canvas for playfully grand designs like Google spaceships.


This is a typical cafeteria at Google. Apparently, staff members can have three gourmet meals a day at these cafeterias, and employee artwork is hanging on the wall. Must be nice.
I'm also enjoying reading Kim Vicente's The Human Factor this semester as well. There seem to be reoccurring themes in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 that have connections to both Nielsen's work and Norman's book. For me, the key factor in designing products for people is to not forget the people! Don't overlook the "human factor" in any design. We're hit with "information overload" in today's world, there is technology all around us (hard and soft technology, high tech and low tech) but one of the problems according to Vicente is that the designers assume too much about the users of their products. When you assume that the users will have as much technical knowledge as the designer has, you may have already made your first mistake in design. Just like the old saying goes, "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me". Vicente uses some great examples from both his university courses ("students design an electric guitar") to real-world examples of designs that must have seen great on the drawing board, but not in real life. Counterintuitive instructions such as those in the Mercedes-Benz E320 make sense to an automotive engineer but not necessarily to a driver. I for one have often why Volkswagen automobiles with manual transmissions require drivers to push down on the stick shift and and shift into 1st to go in reverse. This to me seems like an accident waiting to happen, and why on this design principle alone I would never buy a VW with a manual transmission. Vicente also looks at why technology is spinning out of control in Chapter 2. He focuses on a few factors, such as the prevalent use of a reductionist approach to solving problems by deconstructing those problems into their smallest parts and then studying those in relative isolation. It's sort of the compartmentalization of knowledge. We see this in curriculum or programs of study all the time, and it is apparent at the high school level with the high organization of the entire faculty into departments. We divide up what we know into categories such as physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, art, religion, social studies, and English. The way we acquire knowledge seems to take a "divide and conquer" approach, leading to people that have more strengths in technical/analytical thinking and others that have more strengths in creative/humanistic thinking. This leads to specialization, and different ways of looking at the world around us. I like how Vicente talked about a humanistic view and a mechanistic view of the world, leading us to become "Cyclops", "all walking around half-blind". As a high school teacher, I am very specialized in my area of expertise. I tend to spend more time with people within my department, who share the same area of expertise. It made me think that maybe I need to go out of my comfort zone and make connections with people outside of my department and learn different ways of looking at things. As Vicente points out, this may be at the core of why certain pieces of technology are maybe not as user-friendly, and are perhaps counter-intuitive. Due to the fact that many of the creators of the technology that we use everyday are designers that have a very mechanistic view of the world, and they have lost touch with people who don't have the same level of technical know-how as they do. To that end, someone needs to let Bill Gates know that the Windows OS is not as intuitive as he seems to think it is (let's be honest they ripped off a Mac OS for some of those "innovations" that they brag about at release parties) and I still sometimes curse out MS Word even though I've been using this program since I was in university. I will often say out loud, "Why is it doing that?" At least they got rid of that stupid paper clip giving me advice!