Thinking after Norman’s ideas, as a student two objects that annoy me is the the AC system in the Baraha common rooms and the tiny sinks. In Baraha, the AC is set around 21°C, and when I press the buttons to increase the temperature, the system promises a gradual change, but you have to wait for a long time and I do not feel that the temperature is increasing (and sometimes it is indeed is not), so the interface gives me an illusion of control instead of real control. The tiny sinks have the same problem in a physical way: For me the sinks we have in the dorms are small. The faucet sits so close to the basin that there is almost no space for my hands, and water splashes everywhere, even though the sink looks normal. Both cases show broken mapping: what I do and what actually happens do not match my expectations, and the design never clearly tells me what is really possible. To improve them, the AC interface should not take so long for temperature change and should show honest information about how the centralized system works, and the sinks should be redesigned with more vertical space for more comfortable hand-washing.
For interactive media, I apply Norman’s principles by treating mapping, and conceptual models as the core of how I design my p5 sketches. As an interactive media student, I know that users understand a piece through the system image in front of them, not through my code, so I need clear signifiers on the screen that show what can be clicked, spoken, or dragged. I design interactions so the layout of elements matches their effects, and I give immediate feedback when the user does something, instead of delaying them, like the AC does. When I build a sketch, I test whether someone new can guess what to do in the first few seconds and form a simple model of how the piece behaves, because for a user that understanding is key for deeper, more emotional experience rather than leaving them stuck in trial .