How to make things better

I recently read written by Donald A. Norman called The Design of Everyday Things. The following is a summary combined with some of my own thoughts. Please enjoy.

Donald Norman states that human problem solving is based on past experiences and not logic. By using standards, there is a good chance that a user will have already encountered portions of your object. Those previous encounters will make it easier for them to use your new object. In general people analyze objects and remember only what they need to get by. Exceptions to this would be things that peek your interest. Users will develop a system model in their heads; it may or may not be correct. It is critical that the system projects the correct model to the users.

We should try to design so that use of our objects is understood with just a glance. Put controls near and align them with the things they operate. The controls themselves can even be made to resemble the objects they operate. Always give feedback. Don't drop functionality for aesthetics; you can have both with enough effort. He mentions museums for being at fault for this; too many exhibits look nice but are uninformative.

Norman writes about the human mind and memory for some portion of the book. Several methods of learning and recall are discussed as well. Many of us learn to look in standardized places to trigger recall of a particular event; this place could be a calendar, a clock, or an email account. We do this because we can never count on something being in our mind at any given time. If we don't see any reminders we will often forget about an event. Another thing that I though was interesting and agree with is that a reminder should have a signal and a message.

Norman points out some good ideas concerning errors. Try to understand the way the users think and attempt to fix the areas where you think the users will have trouble. Regardless of how good you think your creation is, you need to have outsiders test it because you have most likely become accustomed to it during the design process.

Norman states that if something as simple as a door has to come with any instruction, then it is a failure. I say that this is not always the case. Some things that we often take for granted are more complex than we give them credit for; we just don't notice how complex they are because of how well they work. An example of this is a automatic sliding door I recently saw. I have walked through this sliding door many times before without a problem. It did it's job of letting people through and keeping the inside cool without causing me any problems. However on one particular day a set of sliding doors was out of order. What I found when I looked at the labeling that had been there all along said to push in case of emergencies. I pushed and the door opened like a standard hinged door. I was surprised to find that the door was capable of being opened in a completely different manner. Had those instructions not been there, I would have had to walk to another exit, or if it had been an emergency, I would have tried sliding the doors to the side.

I think that it is interesting that puts the blame on bad design instead of the users. Sure, there are plenty of poorly designed things out there, but I still believe that people are mechanically incompetent. If we do truly solve problems based soley on our past experiences, then maybe these people are just too inexperienced. I suppose that this lack of experience could arise from either laziness or mecha-phobia.

Do some people use poor design as an excuse for laziness?

This was a question I asked in class. Someone commented on what laziness is, while someone else said that it was the same thing as mecha-phobia. At the time I accepted that, but I wasn't quite satisfied. After thinking about it, I have concluded that they are not the same. While the resulting behavior appears the same from the outside, the internal process is completely different. I think the inexperience due to laziness could be overcome with just a little more observation. As for the people with phobia, they should probably build up experience and confidence with simple devices. However, a better design benefits all.