October 24

Here isa copy of the my group's flow chart for our information design. Click on the concept map image to view it in a larger size.

I'm also going to embed the Prezi here on the blog as well.

Spry Werx Introduces Launch Pad on Prezi

Here is a copy of the written description of our group's written description.

October 19

I've been a bit busy, so I didn't post on the blog prior to last night's class. I'll try to post a longer post tonight to make up for it.

I’m really enjoying reading Norman’s Emotional Design. When I’m reading this book I’m constantly being reminded of other examples of design that I’ve read about or saw on TV, of which I’ll share a few in this blog posting. Norman begins Chapter 3 discussing the distinctive packaging of water bottles, and how design becomes the product. I’m not sure what Norman would say about this particular product, something definitely gets lost in translation.

The three levels that Norman discusses in the chapter are visceral, behavioral, and reflective. At the visceral level the physical dominates, so the look, the feel and sound are most important. The principles underlying visceral design are wired in, and are consistent across people and cultures. People go through these stages/questions when looking at a product designed to appeal to the visceral level: “I want it.” “What does it do?” “And how much does it cost?”. Norman raises some great examples of products that appeal to the visceral level, including iMacs, the VW Beetle, the Audi TT, and the Chrysler PT Cruiser.At the behavioral level performance matters. The most important components of the behavioral level include: function, understandability, usability, and physical feel. The key quote that jumped out at me was, “the first good step in good behavioral design is to understand just how people will use a product.” A lot of times designers/engineers are set in their ways, and they may not anticipate a need unless they observe it firsthand. There is a bit of a disconnect between designers and the people that they are designing their products, their intended audience. Norman also brings up numerous examples of products/innovations that designers have made in the past that even the designers didn’t anticipate their ultimate use, the classic example being Thomas Edison thinking that the phonograph would replace the need for people to dictate letters to one another.
Norman mentioned a design firm called IDEO in this chapter, which reminded me of a story that Nightline did on this company in 1999. In this piece, Nightline gave the designers a task: redesign a shopping cart. The designers started out brainstorming issues/problems associated with the traditional shopping cart. At the end of the challenge the designers came up with this design:

An interesting approach indeed. Some of the advantages of this new design were increased maneuverability of the cart, plastic carts to hold groceries, and a scanning device that would ultimately allow people to do a self-checkout. Will this be the shopping cart of the future. Maybe, maybe not. Consumers who tested the product were concerned about forgetting to scan the products, and many also remarked that they missed the human exchange with the checkout clerk (personally, I could do without this part of grocery shopping).
For the purposes of brevity, I’m going to just respond to a couple of the readings, namely, Chapter 4 from Norman’s Emotional Design and the reading “What is interaction design?”.
In Chapter 4 of Emotional Design one particular quote spoke to me, and that was “technology should bring more to our lives than the improved performance of tasks: it should add richness and enjoyment.” One thing that I was really happy to see discussed also in this chapter was the Japanese bento box, and how it truly is an art form. Having lived in Japan for awhile, this discussion appealed to me because someone else appreciated the aesthetics and beauty of the presentation of food as it happens in Japan. Truly some bento boxes are “art meant to be consumed”.

Another part of Chapter 4 which I feel will be helpful in designing our project will be Patrick Jordan and Lionel Tiger’s work on designing pleasurable products that Norman alluded to in this chapter. This can be summarized as the following:

• physio-pleasure (which appeals to the visceral and behavioral levels)
• socio-pleasure (which appeals to the behavioral and reflective levels)
• psycho-pleasure (behavioral level)
• ideo-pleasure (reflective level)

October 3

After reading Chapter 3 in Norman’s Emotional Design a few items struck me as being important when designing products. Thinking about designing a product that appeals to a consumer at a visceral, behavioral, and reflective level would be quite difficult. Norman points out that “no single design will satisfy everyone” due to variations in culture, personal tastes, and other factors. I found the reference to the Microsoft XBOX ad to be interesting: “Go outside. Get some air. Watch a sunset. Boy, does that get old fast.” Personally, I don’t remember these ads, maybe I’m outside the target demographic, and I’m not watching the right TV shows to see these ads, or I’m not reading the right magazines either. Which helps illustrate the point of market segmentation. Producers of mass consumed products know that they aren’t going to reach everyone, so they target their little market niche. Also, the XBOX ad pits the reflective level against the visceral and behavioral thrills that you can get from playing an XBOX game. Norman also points out that “with the large range of individual, cultural, and physical differences among the people of the world, it is impossible for a single product to satisfy everyone.” True. But what about products that seem to dominate the marketplace (no I’m not going to ge into the Mac vs PC thing again), but how do you explain the popularity of a product like the iPod in its various incarnations? Is it simply a matter of better marketing? Doesn’t the iPod’s popularity span various age demographic groups? Does emotional design have a role to play in the popularity of a product like the iPod?

Sometimes it seems to me that Apple is cannibalizing its own products too. Take for example the new iPod nano and iPod shuffle. It just looks like they decided to take an iPod and cut it in half. And as for the iPad, it's just a bigger version of the iTouch. Weird. 

I also have some reactions to Kim Vicente's The Human Factor, Chapters 3 and 4. In these chapters Vicente is looking the human-tech ladder and specifically physical and psychological factors to consider when designing products. As I was reading Chapter 3's discussion of designing products for human bodies with a variety of physical characteristics, and specifically looking at ergonomically designed products for the hand, for some reason I made connections to the Sony Playstation controllers. Since its introduction with the PS One, Sony's controllers have remained remarkably similar.

There have been technical improvements along the way with this particular controller, with the PS3 controller having wireless BlueTooth capabilities and Sixaxis motion detection, ergonomically, not much has changed. The controller itself is fairly easy to hold, fitting comfortably in your hands, but you probably have to be about 5 or 6 years old in order to be able to hold it correctly (I know this because this the approximate age that my son started to play some video games on the PS2 and PS3). It actually feels good in your hands, and you can play for hours on end. This is an ergonomic design that is set up for comfort, because if it wasn't comfortable to hold in your hands, no one would want to play video games for very long. I'm sure that there was a lot of task analysis at work and observation as well, or they could have just looked at what the competitors were doing and modified their designs for the PS1 controller. There is alot of similarities between the arrangement of the buttons on a Super NES controller and the PS1 controller. It's like as if they copied their design and added a couple of handles and some analog sticks.

I also found the discussion of the Fender Stratocaster really interesting as well. Especially how Leo Fender allowed guitar players to play his prototypes and give him feedback which went into subsequent designs. If you are ever in Seattle, a visit to the Experience Music Project museum is a must-see because they have not only a history of rock 'n' roll music there, they have a lot of guitars on display, and you can see the evolution of effective designs.

Chapter 4 in Vicente's book focused on psychological human factor in the human-tech ladder. Products may work physically but if they are too much of a burden on our limited memory capacity, too complex, or counter-intuitive they will not be well-received. I was reminded of our automated telephone system for the CBE when you need to call in for a substitute. Itès called SEMS (Substitute Employee Management System). It is an automated phone message system, that at times seems hard to navigate. You can't anticipate the numbers that you will be asked to press next, because they do not seem logical. I loved the bit about the Magic Roundabout in Swindon. Personally, I really like Roundabouts, and wish we had more of them in Calgary. Although the Magic Roundabout might look confusing, I am sure that it helps traffic flow nicely. Reading this bit reminded me of the recent fiasco on one of my favorite reality TV shows, the Amazing Race. Race participants had to get themselves from Heathrow Airport in London to Stonehenge. It is not that difficult, trust me, but it was for people that could not read maps or make sense of the roundabouts to get on the proper highway to get to the Salisbury Plain.  It is actually quite funny how so many of them had a hard time with the roundabouts and ended getting all turned around.

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!