For this assignment, I wanted to create something interactive but still simple enough to fully understand and explain. Instead of focusing on complex visuals, I decided to make a reaction time test, where the user presses the space bar as quickly as possible when the screen turns green. I liked this idea because the interaction itself generates the data, instead of relying on an external file.

The sketch starts with a short instruction screen. Once the user presses the space bar, the screen switches to a “wait” state for a random amount of time, and then turns green to signal the user to respond. The reaction time is recorded for each trial, and after a set number of trials, the sketch displays the results. I kept the visuals very minimal and focused more on clarity than decoration.

Embedded Sketch:

For the results, I used three images (a rabbit, a human, and a turtle) to represent fast, average, and slow reaction times. I also added a simple bar chart where each bar represents one trial. Faster reaction times result in shorter bars, while slower reaction times create taller bars. This helped make the differences between trials easier to see.

let barH = map(rt, 200, 2000, 20, 160);
   barH = constrain(barH, 20, 160);

   fill(255, 120, 170);
   rect(chartX + i * barW, chartY - barH, 45, barH);

I’m proud of this section of the code because it takes a the reaction time value and turns it into something visual. By using map(), I was able to convert reaction times into bar heights, which made the results much easier to interpret.

Most of the sketch was built using variables, arrays, conditional statements, functions, and simple state management. Using different states (intro, wait, go, and results) made the interaction much easier to organize. I also used millis() to measure reaction time, which I learned more from p5.js reference and looking at simple reaction-time examples online.

Overall, I’m happy with how this sketch turned out. It helped me understand how user input can be treated as data and then visualized in a clear way. The most challenging part was making sure the input behaved correctly in each state, especially preventing early presses from being counted. For future assignments, I would like to experiment with more detailed feedback per trial or different ways of visualizing reaction time beyond a bar chart.

Reading Reflection:

Norman’s reading made me realize that many everyday frustrations come from poor design rather than user error. He explains how objects often fail to clearly communicate how they should be used, which causes confusion even in simple situations like opening a door. This made me think about how important clarity and feedback are in interactive design.

Relating this to my own work, I realized that even small design choices in my sketches affect how intuitive they feel. If an interaction is not clear, users may not know what to do or may assume something is broken. Norman’s ideas encouraged me to think more carefully about how my sketches guide the user, and how simple visual cues or feedback can make interactions feel more natural and less frustrating.