- What’s something (not mentioned in the reading) that drives you crazy and how could it be improved?
Personally, something that might frustrate me is an object for which multiple people hold varying mental conceptual models of it. Imagine the complication if these varying mental conceptual models conflict. Earphones might not necessarily drive me crazy, but it is initially designed to be worn wrapped around the ear and countless people simply plug it into their ear. I realize the problem is that usually a lack of signifier indicating a round wrapping action around their ear, and that users tend to place huger focus on the earbud, which is to be plugged in the earhole, leading to users simply plugging the earphone into their ear without wrapping it around their ear. I did ponder over how it could be designed to let people know clearly how earphones should be worn, but a better design that I can think of involves a long round rubber earhook placed before the earbud that indicates to the user it should be placed in the long around the antihelix, for which it can only be placed that way if the earphone cable was wrapped around ear.
Taking careful steps in designing an object is necessary, and it is crucial to consider the conceptual model that might be constructed, for these provide value for understanding, in predicting how things will behave, and in figuring out what to do when things do not go as planned.
- How can you apply some of the author’s principles of design to interactive media?
I learned to consider affordances, the possible interactions between people and the environment, as well as incorporate signifiers to signal things, in particular what actions are possible and how they should be done. Signifiers must be perceivable, else they fail to function. I also learned that in design, signifiers are more important than affordances, for they communicate how to use the design. A signifier can be words, a graphical illustration, or just a device whose perceived affordances are unambiguous.
I have a real-life experience of the need for design improvement on my last data visualization project using the author’s principles of design to interactive media. The project involves viewing stellar objects in 3D space, allowing users to zoom in, zoom out and move across the space using mouse controls. Excitedly, I asked my friend to see it. She was keen to try out my project, but she didn’t seem delighted with her experience. Problems? There were not just one, but several:
- I didn’t want users to lose view of the stellar objects in their exploration, so when mouse is released, I automatically resetted the view to the initial view of the stellar objects. But it’s not the way someone else might want it to be. Probably, my friend found this sudden reset quite unnatural, and she may have thought my animation wasn’t functional. She suggested having reset as an option using a button instead. I learned that it’s preferred that after releasing the mouse in some exploration, the view stays at the result of that exploration – the user can then pick up from where the user left off to continue the exploration. This increases the affordance (possible interaction between people and the environment).
- Due to lack of time, I was also not able to put on a signifier that the view would reset. This caused confusion for the user.
- Feedback was quite slow, so this might have played a factor in dettering my friend from continuing to try the animation, going off to do other activities. The delay seemed too long. According to the reading, “Feedback must be immediate: even a delay of a tenth of a second can be disconcerting.” On the contrary, imagine quick feedback in a space simulation: smooth zooming, tilting through space – how inviting to continue exploration.
I hope to incorporate these design considerations and principles in my upcoming assignments and future projects. I would love to help users enjoy a wonderful experience!