Monday, November 2, 2009
Things that make us smart:defending human attributes in the age of the machine

‘Things that make us smart’ by Donald Norman was originally published in 1993. The book develops the theme and concern raised in his book ‘Psychology of Everyday things’ (POET), first published in 1988. In POET, Norman proved how design of a certain object can help or hinder us in completing everyday activities like opening doors, operating fridge or drink machines. This book starts with this theme and takes a step forward to describe the complex interaction between human thoughts and the technology it creates.
As a cognitive scientist Norman talks about “mental tools” which he refers to as cognitive artifacts. According to Norman, artifacts allow us “to think better and more clearly” and expand our human knowledge. "There is only so much we can remember; only so much we can learn. But among our abilities is that of devising artificial devices-artifacts-that expand our capabilities. We invent things that make us smart."(p.3)Norman classifies these artifacts that aid cognition into the categories of physical artifacts i.e. pencils, calculators and computers and mental artifacts i.e. reading, arithmetic, logic, language.
These categories of artifacts are further subdivided into tools of Experiential Cognition/Learning and tools for reflective cognition/learning. The experiential mode of cognition leads to a state in which we perceive and react to the event around us, efficiently and effortlessly. The experiential mode according to Norman is often exploited by entertainment (p.15); it involves use of artifacts that “allow us to experience events as if we were there.”Reflective mode of cognition is that of comparison and contrast, thought, and decision-making. This is the mode that leads to new ideas and novel responses.
The learning process of a human mind is categorised into three different kinds by Norman. They are:
- Accretion: Accretion is like gathering facts. This is how we add to our knowledge; learn new vocabulary or perhaps the spelling of an already known word.
- Tuning: Tuning is about practicing what we already know. Shaping the knowledge structure in thousand of little ways.
- Restructuring: forming the proper conceptual structures.
The power of cognitive artifacts to allow us to "overcome the limitations of brainpower" leads Norman to argue that "the real power of the human mind, today and in the future, lies with our technologies".(p.127) But things that can make us smart also make us dumb. Norman says that human mind is limited in capability. Technology has enhanced our capabilities and helped us think better and more clearly but at the same time it has far outstripped our understanding of them. Norman argues that this is mostly because technologies are being developed with a Machined-Centred Point of View rather than a Human-Centred Point of View. The machine-centred point of view emphasises complex, precise actions that ignore human skills and attributes. Norman’s key concern here is that most of the technology today take a machine-centred view of design of machines and totally ignore the understanding of people. “As a result, the technology that is intended to aid human cognition and enjoyment more often interferes and confuses than aids and clarifies.”(p.9)
According to Norman, cognitive artifacts work more in our favour if technologies are developed with human-centred view of design because it would emphasise interfaces that people find comfortable and compatible with their fundamental capabilities. Throughout the book Norman demands technology to be built with human-centred point of view. He believes that any technology that attempts to make you think like machine, because it’s easier to build a machine than to understand how the human mind really functions is going to have cons.

Later in the book Norman delves further into how the human mind works and remember things, how knowledge becomes organised in our minds and how to design technology with this in mind. In chapter 5 “The Human Mind”, Norman compares the human mind with Science. He stresses that we cannot apply the rule of hard science to the human mind because modern science is based on reductionism and humans are social creature, and a lot of learning is social. We are not either like machines capable of complex computation. We can deal with things like deception, the appreciation of beauty, music etc. We are capable to represent knowledge, to form representations and to form casual explanation of events.
Norman believes that human intelligence has evolved from:
- Episodic Memory: Remembering events that you’ve experienced.
- Mimesis: The ability to act out or mime intentions, desires and wants.
- Mythic: communication rich concepts and thoughts, stories and myths that provide explanations for events of life.
- External representation: expand our abilities beyond what our biological heritage alone makes possible, through writing and other tools that use the affordance of environment to overcome the limitations of our brainpower.
What Norman is trying to explain in this chapter is that Human Mind is different from hard science, machines and animals because we are good at creating mental models(unlike machines), not at highly accurate repetitive task (like machines). We have self-awareness too unlike animals. Characteristic such as cooperative behaviour, social graces, and norms of social interaction makes us complex and unique in every way.
In the chapter “Predicting the Future”, Norman again points out “it is not just the technology, but the people who work with it.” When technology is first introduced, both the technology and the society have to adapt (for example telephone, Fax machines etc). Telephone when first introduced was considered to be a broadcast medium. Later on people realised it was a means of potential communication. Hence the mutual accommodation takes place. However, Norman says that a new technology introduces new problems. Problems such as invasion of privacy, issues with hackings etc are nothing new to us today. Do we want our personal data to be seen by others? Do we want others to manipulate our information? Norman says that it is not the question of whether the technology can be made to work or not. The question is how effectively or efficiently it is made to work with human. Same argument as he used before - the entertainment people use the experiential mode for entertainment at the cost of reflection; the programmers use reflection at the cost of experience.
Just as Mcluhan’s hot and cold medium, Norman also classifies technology into hard and soft technology. According to Norman, hard technologies are technologies where human must conform to rules of the technology. Soft technology is more flexible and adaptive. I found this chapter on Hard and Soft technology very confusion. I personally believe that technology is hard by nature because it is rule driven and not very adaptive. Technology implementation though can be soft. For instance, when designing technology if we understand that we are working with hard building blocks that can be arranged by us in different ways we are able to manipulate the technology more effectively.
In the final chapter "Technology is not neutral", Norman touches the discussion on man/machine and experiential/reflective again by saying "Each technology poses a mind-set, a way of thinking about it and the activities to which it is relevant, a mind-set that soon pervades those touched by it, often unwittingly, often unwillingly" (p. 243) According to Norman, machines are not capable of reflection like people. A machine does not have an internal representation of knowledge and the ability to examine, modify and compare its representations (Compositional representation medium).
In chapter 2 Norman reminds us of the motto of the 1933 Chicago World fair- “Science Finds, Industry Applies, man Conforms”. That was a machine-centred point of view. The key point of the book is to send a message that it is time to revolt. People shouldn’t conform and we cannot confirm either. It’s the technology who should confirm and science to study and people who should propose.
The book is a great read to understand and analyse the relationship between technology and cognitive ability of a human. Norman wrote this book 15 years ago and we have witnessed a great deal of technological changes within those years. But surprisingly, so little has changed in the areas discussed in this book, i.e. becoming more human centric. Therefore, the issues raised in this book are still valid (except some technology examples which seem to be outdated) and still needs attention from designers and businesses involved in technology production.
Monday, October 26, 2009
An interview with Andrew Feenberg
View the entire article here
Andrew Feenberg, the author of widely cited books like Alternative Modernity: The Technical Turn in Philosophy and Social Theory(1995),Questioning Technology(1999), and Transforming Technology(2002) was interviewed by Mark Zachry in February 2007. Feenbergs' books on the subject illuminate numerous aspects of technology's ever-increasing influence that are so often overlooked. For Feenberg, technology is the most important issue of our era. It is a major constituent of our society and is intimately connected with politics, economics, culture and all forms of social and personal life.
Feenberg started computer work during 1980's when he was at the Western Behavioural Science Institute (WBSI). During his time there, he and few of his colleagues created the first online education Program. For the first question asked by Zachry (how did you come to be interested in computers?), Feenberg says that his interest started while he was working on the online education program and also during his time in France where he studied computer-mediated communication. He states that user agency is an important theme in technology studies. Users play an important role in re-design of any technology. Feenberg gives an example of internet which was initially designed for information exchange, not communication. The users changed the purpose of the internet.
Towards the end of the interview, Zachry asks questions on Online Communities and education. After few years of leaving WBSI, there was a lot of hype about online education and Feenberg always found himself in the middle of the controversy surrounding the topic. A lot of people like David Noble didn't really like the idea and called it a 'Digital Diploma Mills'. Regardless of the controversy, Feenberg was provided the fund to create the software by the US Department of Education. His first effort resulted to produce the software called TextWeaver which didn’t have much impact as expected. But the newest version, called Marginalia which is web based, has received a lot of attention.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The Design of Everyday things: Preface to the 2002 Edition
Dr. Norman was a cognitive scientist before he wrote the book. His interest gradually shifted towards usability/human errors after he and few of his colleagues examined the nuclear power plant accident at Three Mile Island in the United States and concluded that the fault laid in the design of the control room not the control room operators. He became interested in human error and hoped that his understanding of error would provide ways to teach people how to avoid mistakes. The author mentions that he spent some time in Cambridge England, at the Medical Research Council's world famous Applied Psychology Unit and was continually amused and frustrated by the workings of the building. He states that 'The Design of Everyday Thing' is the outcome of his frustration during his time in England.
The book was initially published with the title 'Psychology of Everyday Things' but was changed to 'Design of Everyday Things' (DOET) in the 2002 edition. The author says that the meaning was more meaningful and better conveyed the message of the book.The book covers mostly three critical topics. They are
- It is not your fault: According to the author, if you cannot figure out how to use a certain thing, it is not your fault, it's the design. Anything and everything should be clearly understandable to casual user if the design's purpose is to encourage use and efficiency
- The Power Of Observation: People learn a lot through observation. But the problem is you need to learn how to watch correctly.
- Design Principles: DOET contains several important design principles but the following are the short list of the most important ones
- Conceptual Model: We as a human being receive information, process it and respond accordingly. According to the author a good designed system should enable user to create the right conceptual model of the system.
- Feedback: Dr Norman believes that every system or application should provide user with some feedback for their action. A simple example could be taken of an online application form. The user should be provided with some feedback after they submit the form so that they are aware that the form has been submitted.
- Constraints: 'The surest way to make something easy to use, with few errors, is to make it impossible to do otherwise- to constrain the choices'. Dr Norman says that to prevent mistakes we should restrict the kind of interaction that can take place in an object. For example the car door should not be locked if we left our key inside the car. The designers should make sure when the keys are inside the ignition switch, the door cannot be locked.
- Affordance: Affordance refers to the perceived and actual properties of an object that gives clues to its operation. For example plates (on doors) are for pushing and knobs are for turning.
The first chapter of POET starts off describing the importance of design. "Well designed objects are easy to understand. They contain visible clues to their operations. Poorly designed objects can be difficult and frustrating to use. They provide no clues or sometimes false clues." Norman introduces the term visibility here. The visibility of the product's controls and functions allows the user to map their relationships and see what the uses the product affords, something Norman calls a conceptual model/mental model. These models provide user with a clear idea of how the product should work.
Giving various examples on conceptual model and visibility Norman introduces two major design principles for understandability and usability in this chapter. They are:
1. Provide a good conceptual model
2. Make things visible
Giving the right conceptual model of a device or a product could be very tricky sometimes for the designers. Norman gives an example of his fridge at home. Norman says "control of refrigerator is made difficult because the manufacturer provides a false conceptual model. The fridge had only one thermostat and only one cooling mechanism for controlling the temperature. One control adjusts the thermostat setting, the other the relative proportion of cold air sent to each of the two compartments of refrigerator. The conceptual model provided by the manufacturer makes it difficult for users to use the product.
The user will have a mental model of how to use the object, and the object also yields a conceptual model (design model) for how it can be used. When the two models coincide, then there is a close "mapping". Norman writes that the designer usually expects the user's model to his design model, but this is obviously not always the case. Providing a good system image through documentations, instructions and labels act as a bridge between the design model and the user mental model.
Norman gives an example of a telephone to demonstrate poor visibility. Telephones today have lot of functions but are poorly designed. The functions are not easily visible for the users. Most users don't even realise that the functions are available. Norman says, "Whenever the number of possible actions exceeds the number of controls, there is apt to be difficulty". The telephone system has 24 functions, yet only fifteen controls and none of them labelled for specific action.
Lastly, Norman describes the principle of feedback. According to him, any action of a user should produce some feedback so the user can tell if the desired effect was achieved or not.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Social Media Revolution!!
I really enjoyed watching this video. Some of the facts shown in video were very interesting.One particular fact that really impressed me was how long facebook took to add 100 million users in their site.It is certainly a strong sign of Social Media Revolution. It cannot just be a fad anymore.
I found a brilliant video floating around the internet by Markham Nolan. The video is targetted at two particular groups of people operating in the online content marketplace; people with money to spend but no idea about what they're doing, and so called 'social media experts' who claim that because they have 10 million Twitter followers and a highly active stumbleUpon account.
It's a hilarious video but you might want to use your head phone before watching it.
What Value do Users Derive from Social Networking Applications?
The authors adapt the experiential view of value rather than traditional view of value as cost and benefit analysis for their research. They believe that Social Networking value is not evaluated with currency but with time and money. Therefore, they adapt the experiential value concept of Holbrook(2004;1994) and Sheth et al(1991) to categorize four types of value generated by Facebook applications; emotional, functional, social and altruistic (humane).
- Emotional: Pleasure, fantasy or fun gained by using an application.
- Functional: measured by performance and technical features.
- Social: generated by connections with other people enabled by using the application.
- altruistic(humane): obtained by helping others or society.
Having defined "Cool" and value of Social Networking Sites, the authors conduct survey on their two questions. For their first question what value is created by a ‘cool’ application?’, the following theme emerged:
- the ability of the application to facilitate self–expression of interests,values or personality.
- the ability to facilitate competition/comparison with others and novelty/rarity.
Neale and Russell-Bennett conclude by saying that even though functionality of an application plays an important role, it alone cannot make an application a success. It must be combined with either social or emotional value to create significant 'coolness'.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]