Emotional Design Pt. 2

1. "...appealing to the intellect is no guarantee of success. Many well-acclaimed serious works of art and music are relatively unintelligible to the average person....for in the exalted realm of literature, art, and professional criticism, it would appear that when something can be clearly understood, it is judged as flawed, whereas when something is impenetrable, it must of necessity be good."

I chose this passage because I can relate to what the author is saying here. When I read this, I immediately thought about a visit I paid to the Art Institute of Chicago this summer, during the opening of their new modern wing. Many, including myself, anticipated this event because I enjoy art and was curious to see what is "modern art."  As I stepped into the galleries, one by one I had a strange feeling of confusion; I felt like I didn't understand the artwork because it was so abstract, yet so simple. Actually, there was one series of paintings that looked like a kindergardener could have produced. And as that thought came to mind, I thought I just didn't "get it." I feel this experience directly relates to this passage because, as an average person, I felt like I couldn't appreciate the artwork and that I needed an artist's mentality to understand what I was viewing. Because I did not "understand" it, I felt, just as Norman points out, that it must of necessity be good. Likewise, the paintings whose concepts I did grasp I felt were less meaningful. Looking back, I don't think they are, but to the average person, this confusion leads them to believe they just don't know how to appreciate what is in front of them.

2. Of the three, visceral design was the hardest concept for me to grasp by looking solely at the name. It is much easier to understand that behavioral relates to function, and reflective relates somehow to the long term relationship one has with something. Reflective was difficult to comprehend as well, but I think the term fits well with its definition. After looking up the word visceral in the dictionary, I still wasn't sure what it meant. And after reading the section, I wondered how the word visceral related to the topic. I wouldn't rename it because it is easy enough to understand once one reads the explanation, but certain phrases like, "outward appearance," or "immediate attraction" might help at the start. The word reflective signifies there is some sort of relationship or experience with something that one can look back on. However reflective design, as Norman writes, has two meanings. Other than the long term relationship with an object, reflective designs also send messages about a person to others and is about self-image. The word reflective is harder to relate with this definition, but with time it becomes clear that designs "reflect" a certain image to people and on people. 

3. The designer has to look at what his or her goal is for the end product in order to decide which design of the three is more important for that product. The designer should focus on one to start with, but a good design can encompass all three. If the designer wants to make a school bag, he has to decide what is most important: aesthetics or functionality. A good design would be a bag that is appealing, sturdy and spacious. However, there are those designs that aim solely for aesthetics and disregard functionality. Picture frames are examples of products that are more reflective. What is more personal than a photo of the family sitting in the living room? People have relationships with these types of products. Anything that someone buys to look trendy or classy is reflective. Anything that someone buys to project a certain image of his or herself to others is reflective.  More behavioral products are things like books. Unless someone enjoys collecting and displaying books, most people do not buy books based on their outward appearance. If a student needs a book for class, he or she doesn't look for the prettiest edition; a used book will do the job. Other types of behavioral products are garbage cans, school desks, fans, clocks, school bags, mirrors, gym shoes, school supplies, etc. The more visceral products are products like cars, clothes, cell phones, MP3 players, TVs, refrigerators, furniture, bedding, etc. Anything that instantly attracts people and makes them want a certain product is visceral.

Emotional Design

1. The author opens the chapter talking about the emotional link between the consumer and the product. He claims people experience a certain attachment to their possessions over time, eventually seeing them as more than just household items. These products instead become gateways to past memories. A paper shredder doesn't just shred paper, there's a story that goes along with it. Products go beyond behavioral design in this way. Sometimes, eventually, they are there to serve no function at all other than to remind the owner of the past.
Norman points out something called the "wow" factor. When someone sees a product that stands out because of size, color or packaging, and is very appealing, he or she is drawn in by its attractiveness. For example, a girl walks into a clothing store and lays eyes on an elegant black dress, and immediately thinks, "I have to have that!" This is an example of the "wow" factor. Norman believes this stems from packaging, the way that certain designs distinguish themselves from others.
Visceral design. Visceral design is a design that attracts someone because of its outward appearance. Norman says, "At the visceral level, physical features--look, feel, and sound--dominate." Visceral designs are all about appealing to the senses; that elegant black dress and sports cars are perfect examples.
Behavioral design. These designs focus primarily on use and operation rather than aesthetics. Norman's main point in this section is designers must understand how people will use a product in order to create a successful product. If something already exists, the designer's job is to observe what flaws remain and what can be improved. In the example of the cup holder, the designer realized, through observation, that people needed a space to put their drinks while driving. The designer would not have known this was needed without close observation. That is something Norman calls enhancement, and there is also innovation. Innovation is much trickier because there is no platform to build from, no previous experiences to learn from, so consumers' needs are less apparent. With either enhancement or innovation, there is a design challenge. People don't always know how to articulate their needs. When they struggle with a certain product, they believe its their own fault and not a design flaw. The design is in fact flawed, and the designer's challenge is to address the needs of the consumers even when they cannot articulate these needs.
Norman's next key point is that a design should be universally usable, and that "usage is the critical test of a product." Some products, like instruments, are not universally usable but are still understandable and function well; this is an exception because learning to play an instrument well isn't something that one can do picking it up the first time. However, a design has succeeded if it can be used by everyone, including the handicapped, the blind, or the deaf.
In regard to behavioral design, Norman points out that many designs fail because the designers and engineers are self-centered. Everything should be human-centered, and designers must learn to look and experience products through the consumer's eyes. This is difficult for them to do because "they know too much and too little." Their minds are so technologically advanced that they cannot possibly use things as normal people would. They see everything differently.
Reflective design. Reflective design is all about the meaning behind objects, the message they convey, and how they connect with the consumers on a personal level. On the other hand, it is about the message the object sends to others, including self-image. In Norman's example of the two watches, one is for aesthetic purposes and the other for more practical purposes. The first is viscerally attractive, and the second is more behavioral. This leads into his third point that reflective design is all in the eye of the beholder.

2. This chapter focuses on how design evokes emotion in the consumer. It does not focus as much on what factors should play a role in good design, but rather the relationship designs have with the consumers. Norman talks a lot about how people have the ability to connect with objects and create memories with them. He writes about devious design and how design plays tricks in our world. This chapter focuses on human interaction with design in our everyday life, in everything from cars and clothes, to supermarkets.

3. Visceral design: My phone broke this summer so I went to at&t to buy a new one. As I was looking through the selection, my eyes immediately went towards the phones with the touch screens. The design was a success because I ended up buying a phone with a touch screen and I wasn't very interested in any others.

Behavioral design: In high school, there were always those girls who carried around purses for bookbags. That was something I never understood because I felt a purse could never carry all of the heavy books I needed for class. Instead, I bought a regular bookbag with shoulder straps which is just what I needed to carry everything. The bag was a success because it held the weight, maybe it wasn't as fashionable as carrying a purse, but I felt I had enough space for the things I needed.

Reflective design: I went to the poster sale in Hicks last week and I ended up buying four posters. I wanted to buy posters that I thought reflect who I am, what I like, what I'm like, and that would say something about my personality. The posters succeeded in doing so because I felt they were a reflection of what I like. Looking at my room, I feel like it really does describe a little part of who I am.

The Design of Everyday Things #2

1. "In England I visited a home with a fancy new Italian washer-drier combination, with super-duper multi-symbol controls, all to do every thing you ever wanted to do with the washing and drying of clothes. The husband (an engineering psychologist) said he refused to go near it. The wife (a physician) said she had simply memorized one setting and tried to ignore the rest."

This passage is interesting because it illustrates two design flaws still prevalent in our world today. Clearly the washer-drier was a well thought out product in which the designers took into account all one's possible needs. There was obviously some discrepancy between what the designers believed were one's basic needs and what actually were. The design flaw still prevalent today is how designers create a product that may look great, do a lot, and do it well, but they never think to test out their product in advance. They never think to see how someone other than themselves, the makers, might approach using this object. Clearly it will be much easier for one of their own to operate a complicated device like that, but for ordinary folk, it's not second nature. The other design flaw this passage illustrates is a flaw that rests more heavily on the buyer instead of the designer. As the author points out, if the product was so difficult to operate, why did the couple buy it in the first place? He makes a good point; if people keep purchasing products such as this, the designers will think their product is in demand and therefore will never really know to fix its complexities. 

2. This book still influences designers today because his points about design flaws and necessities are completely relevant to modern day design. A successful product is still one that is simple, and visibility will always be a target point. If a product is too difficult to maneuver and looks very complex on the outside, no one is going to buy it. The need for visibility is greater now than ever because of how technology is rapidly changing. In order to operate these high tech designs, visibility is key for the consumer. This goes hand in hand with his point that number of functions should never exceed number of controls; this seems inevitable with modern day technology and consumer demands. Likewise, there still exists a need for designers to create aesthetically pleasing products. Therefore, his point about how designers do not always take the consumer into account and test their product is valid. There will always be those fancy Italian washer-driers on the market, and people will indeed buy them. People do not always care about function first, and instead focus on the aesthetics. Designers should always test their product before it is put on the market. In a world where people have less patience with putting together a product and want things done right away, there is no room for poor instructions and complex designs. 

3. The factors I would include on a checklist for evaluating the design of a product are: visibility and clarity of the design; aesthetics that do not deter from its operation; need for immediate feedback; need for someone other than designer to test the product in advance; direct correlation between intended action and actual operation; clarity of use of design without instructions; number of functions should equal number of controls; natural mapping (turn wheel to the right, car turns right); creating a balance between price and appearance, and functionality and usability; simplicity (paradox of technology). 

The Design of Everyday Things

1. I felt the author focused primarily on the need for visibility in design.  He believes, and I agree, that a designer succeeds in creating a product that offers sufficient visible clues. Therefore, a poorly designed object is one that does not provide adequate external clues to its operation. 

A designer has succeeded when his or her product pleases the user aesthetically yet is still user-friendly. The author claims there is a discrepancy between what the designer believes is a perfectly usable product and what is actually best for the consumer. Furthermore, there must be a direct and simple relationship between intended action and actual operation. He claims, "when simple things need pictures, labels, or instructions, the design has failed." They key to designing is making a product that actually functions as it appears it should. 

The author also claims a good product is one that provides feedback, a way for the user to know he or she is using it correctly.  The user should be able to test the product and not have to wait 24 hours to see if he or she is using it as intended by the maker, as in his example with the refrigerator. 

Another key to a successful design is experimentation; to ensure its effectiveness, one must test it. Another key point in the article is that the number of functions should equal the number of controls. This ensures that there is only one function per control, not leaving the user confused. This point goes along with the author's claim that a control's movement should correspond to its function. If one turns the steering wheel to the right, the car should turn right. 

A good design is one that considers the user's needs and demands, something cost effective, aesthetically pleasing and overall usable. 

The author brings up an interesting point regarding the maturation of both an industry and its technicians. A simple product is created, and is fully usable, serving its purpose. Over time, however, the designers discover ways to expound upon this simple yet effective device and soon develop something that is more complex but not necessarily a better product. As he points out in the article, what good is something that is too complicated to use?

2. One product that I have had difficulty using is my Nike digital wrist watch. There are four black buttons and one that is pink. The problem with the watch is that there are these five buttons, but seven labels around the screen. One is clearly marked "set/light", and it does turn the light on easily but in order to set the time one must press and hold down. After that, there's no obvious way of knowing which button is used to adjust the hour and minute. I have yet to figure out what the pink button actually does. The watch is all around confusing, so confusing that I cannot explain all the things that are confusing about it. This watch addresses a couple of principles pointed out in the article. The first, there are no visual clues as to which buttons one should use to adjust the time, date, etc. Second, the number of functions exceeds the number of controls.

3. The designers of iPod got it right from the start. They created a simple product that provided an equal ration between functions and controls. They built a device that was aesthetically pleasing and with sufficient visual clues so as not to confused the consumer. Clearly the "Menu" button took one to the Menu, the pause button paused, the right and left arrows led one to the previous or next song, and the scroll wheel served one purpose. The iPod user knew exactly what would happen with each control and received immediate feedback; the iPod's intended action went along with its actual operation. 

The iPod team knew their product would not succeed unless tested and proved, so they sent iPods to potential buyers for feedback. As pointed out in the article, many designers do not keep their audience's best interest in mind, and aim for aesthetics rather than practicality. The iPod, however, was practical and it was a good looking music player. I do believe the iPod met the customer's demands. While not cheap, the number of people with an iPod by the end of their first year is an indication of its success. 

I think the iPod is the perfect example of a point Norman brings up later in his article. He talks about how as an industry matures and technicians become more competent, newcomers figure out ways to "improve" upon a simple device and create a product that is no longer simple. This is the case with the iPod. While many would disagree that products like the iPod Touch are confusing devices, but many would agree. As we talked about in class yesterday, iPod began with a simple product and now look at where they are. They had a perfectly understandable product, but over time the technicians got fancy and decided to add more functions and more applications. The iPod at the beginning of the iPod generation is in so many ways so unlike what it was at the start. For some it may be more confusing and less reliable, or for others it might still be the perfect thing.

The Perfect Thing

1. The first step of the design process is something a third grader is familiar with-brainstorming, deciding what sort of product you want to create. In Apple's case, the designers knew they wanted to develop some form of an already well-known device, an MP3 player. From there, they thought about what flaws they wanted to avoid based on their experiences with the MP3 players. They knew they wanted to create something with greater storage space, pocket-size and something attractive. They thought of weight, battery life and cost. When Fadell was asked to work on the project, he was told to start by basically building a small computer. From there, it's a matter of organization, compromise and practicality.  Once Apple decided what would go on the spinning wheel, if there would be on/off buttons, they had to decide on a name. All of that falls into the larger category of all trial and error, talking about what you like and what you don't like, followed by hours and hours of questioning. Once products are constructed, they must be tested. Before Apple put the iPod on the market, they sent their product out to be tested by the public. After all, keeping your audience in mind is half the battle in designing a product.

2. The factors I would use to evaluate a "perfect thing" would include cost, size, weight, visual appeal, practicality, sustainability, material (durability), long term use (if possible or not), compatibility with surroundings. 

3. The first iPod I owned was the iPod Nano, and the only reason I now have an iPod Touch is because it came for free with my laptop this summer. I've been able to compare and contrast the two and Apple's come a long way in just under a decade. The Nano is definitely small, the screen is about 1/15 of the screen of an iPod touch, but I wouldn't consider that a weakness. In my opinion, the song quality of a Nano is just as good as the iPod touch, which just shows how competent it's been from the start. However, the iTouch is definitely more visually appealing, and Apple's ability to create a product so appealing to the public over and over again is astounding. The ability to upload photos, watch movies and music videos and play games are strengths as well. Unlike a radio, songs won't skip as you walk around, hit potholes while in the car or even fall down the stairs. I feel like its weaknesses are limited; it scratches easily, but that's why Apple sells protective coverings. Battery life is often an issue, especially with smaller iPods like the nano. 

First post!

Hello! My name is Emily and I was born and raised in Chicago, IL. I have two parents and an older sister, Lauren, who is two years older than I am.  I am really looking forward to this seminar for many reasons.  I'm not exactly sure what the course entails but it was the first seminar that caught my attention. I'm eager to discover if the realm of design is something that interests me and if I may want to pursue it further. I hope this class sparks some sort of passion inside because right now I really have no idea what I want to do with my life or what sort of major I want to pursue!