Don Norman’s arguments on affordance, discoverability, and communication offer a compelling and analytical perspective on how interactive objects should be designed. Unlike readings such as “The Art of Interactive Design,” which tend to focus more on the finished product, Norman delves into the intricacies of poorly designed objects, analyzing the root causes and suggesting improvements. His credibility as an engineer strengthens his arguments, as he understands both the technical and human aspects of design. This raises an interesting question: if a professional fictional writer presented the same solutions, would they carry the same weight? This reflects the importance of practical experience in validating design solutions. I relate to Norman’s critique of poorly designed objects; for example, VR/AR goggles often suffer from an imbalance that makes them front-heavy. Redesigning them to be lighter would significantly enhance the immersive experience. This demonstrates how affordance and ergonomics directly impact the user experience.
In discussing the “Paradox of Technology,” Norman argues that as technology becomes more functional, it becomes harder to learn. I agree but question the extent to which this should be solely a designer’s responsibility. While Norman emphasizes that engineers should approach design from a non-logical, human perspective, this principle should also apply to the Paradox of Technology. Designers face limitations in simplifying complex functionality, suggesting that the solution lies in ensuring engineers design with the average human in mind, not just other engineers. This point is particularly relevant when considering advanced technologies like Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI). While intended to serve humanity, ASI must be designed to accommodate the everyday user, not just the logical thinker, ensuring it remains accessible and understandable.
Feedback, another of Norman’s key points, is essential in design, as humans are naturally impatient with technology. However, the expectation of rapid feedback, especially in digital interactions, can have unintended psychological consequences, such as increased anxiety and impatience in the extreme usage of cellphones among young people. While Norman rightly argues that feedback should be provided correctly and appropriately, I contend that excessively fast responses can condition users to expect instant gratification, potentially harming mental well-being. Designers and engineers must be mindful of balancing efficiency with psychological impact, aligning with the principles of Human-Centered Design (HCD). Norman’s insights on affordance, feedback, and human-centered design are not just applicable but essential in shaping interactive media. Especially in contexts like end-of-semester showcases, where media installations encounter a diverse audience, applying Norman’s principles ensures intuitive and meaningful human-machine interactions.