For me, the most interesting part of this chapter from "Emotional Design" was the section entitled "The Devious Side of Design." There were many intriguing examples from this section that made me really think about my personal shopping experiences, and showed me that we all are constantly being manipulated by the stores that we frequent. For example, I found the supermarket example to be the most interesting part of the chapter. "To disconcert shoppers as a selling tool is hardly news. Supermarkets long ago learned to put the most frequently desired items at the rear of the store, forcing buyers to pass by isles of tempting impulse purchases. Moreover, related items can be placed nearby. Do people rush to the store to buy milk? Put the milk at the rear of the store, and put cookies nearby."As I was reading this passage, I realized that this was both very accurate and very frustrating. Every grocery store I have ever been in, the milk and dairy products are located in refrigerators at the back of the store, while the produce and meat are also located far away from the checkout counters. Many stores are also laid out in such a way that when one is proceeding to the checkout line, it is necessary to walk down another isle. While I had never noticed it before, this is a definite attempt by the store management to manipulate shoppers into buying more products that they don't really need. The more I think about it, shopping in grocery stores is really a pain, especially if you don't shop there on a regular basis. Finding the products that you need involves walking in front of numerous isles, looking up at hanging signs to point you in the right direction. Also, have you ever been in a supermarket and gotten separated from another person you were with. It can feel like you are stuck in a maze, which is probably another design trick to get people to buy more products. It would make so much more design sense to lay out the stores in a much simpler manner. For example, all products that do not require temperature control could be arranged in alphabetical order, so that "cereal" was located next to "dog food." This design might require some adjustments, but concepts like this would simplify the grocery shopping process.
The terms "visceral design," "behavioral design," and "reflective design" were not too hard for me to understand. However, I think that the categories would have been more useful if they were named according to the user's reaction. For example, instead of "visceral design," which requires the understanding of a relatively uncommon vocabulary word, a more simple name might be "wow design." The author said that visceral design is all about the "wow factor," so this new name might give a general audience a more clear picture of the concept. In addition, "behavioral design" could be renamed "use design." The author came right out and said that behavioral design is all about use: function, understandability, usability, and physical feel. "Use" might be a good word to replace "behavioral" because it pin points exactly what this type of design is all about. I do not think I would change the name of "reflective design" because this is such a broad category that means something different for everyone. In order to understand reflective design, one must truly "reflect" upon his or her self image, cultural influences, values, and beliefs. As we saw in class today, reflective design was a topic of extensive discussion, and I think the vague name suits the broad category.
Deciding whether visceral, behavioral, or reflective design is important for a particular product is very difficult, and I think the best solution is to find ways to incorporate all three into products whenever possible. Many products need the "wow factor" of visceral design to draw consumers in, but the behavioral and reflective aspects are also very important to determining whether or not the consumer will buy and use the product. I think that many external products that are displayed to the general public require strong visceral design. For example, clothing, sunglasses, and cars, which are all ways that we are seen in public, should have visceral characteristics. Behavioral design is especially important for things that we don't necessarily show off to the rest of the world, but that we use and rely upon on a regular basis. For instance, computers, phones, and suitcases require strong behavioral design to be successful. Reflective design is much more difficult, but I believe that sports products and equipment should play to this type of design, especially in marketing. Put Roger Federer in a commercial for Nike tennis apparel, and people will buy that brand of clothing. Reflective design must appeal to people's greatest passions, including athletic or career aspirations, cultural or family identity, and religious beliefs.
No comments:
Post a Comment