Credibility Week 4.

Q1. This reading outlines ‘Credibility and The World Wide Web’ (Fogg,2013), he discusses why it is so important to evaluate the credibility of your resource. Fogg discusses trustworthiness and expertise as these two components create the credibility you are looking for when researching for resources. Expertise is necessary in the credibility of a site, this is because you need to know and be thorough in what field of knowledge you are writing about before you can make assumptions for yourself into that specific topic. This is why people turn to resources because they need to understand a certain topic of discussion before actually making their own assumptions. When you have a website that has a lot of credible experts that are known for being thoroughly knowledgeable in this topic, the website automatically becomes more credible and gains your trust as a user. When you look at a website and it has all these funny pictures and weird pop up bars you are more likely to give one look to it and the close the tab. This is why trust is so key in defining your credibility in a website, if your website doesn’t look credible but has a capability to deliver good expertise knowledge you are loosing users because of how untrustworthy your site is. Your site needs to look respectable and smart for people to trust its credibility otherwise your site will hold no credibility.

Q2. Wikipedia is a great source for good solid information but it isn’t a credible source for academic writing. This is essentially because anyone can go onto Wikipedia and edited to the information of their choosing, you can’t rely on this source because you don’t know how to back the information you have found because it is hard to trace from so many different people. Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia) also stated that people should not cite Wikipedia. When the founder of the site itself doesn’t even consider the site a reputable place of information then the credibility is automatically lowered how can you trust a site when the founder doesn’t even consider it a credible site for information. When you open up Wikipedia it can be deceiving because it looks like a very ‘smart’ and reputable site that holds good resourceful information, which is where people can be confused because if a site looks credible isn’t it automatically credible? This is why you need to do thorough research into your said topic and not just use one website such as Wikipedia. When a sites credibility is so often questioned it becomes harder to hold it to a high credible standard if so many people are doubting its credibility this is why it isn’t used a academic source.

Performance Load: Week 3.

Q1.

This article explains what Performance, Cognitive and Kinematic load is and how in design reducing these loads can produce a more publically accessible design. ‘The greater the effort to accomplish a task, the less likely the task will be accomplished successfully.’ Principle of least effort.

The Performance load is based on the degree of mental and physical activity required to achieve a set goal. If the performance load is high performance time and errors increase therefore the probability of accomplishing the goal decreases.

Cognitive Load is the amount of mental activity required to accomplish a set goal, the simpler some set design is made the easier it is to understand and remember for the brain hence making it more successful.

Kinematic load is the degree of physical activity e.g. the amount of force, how much physical activity is needed. If the task requires a very high kinematic load and making it strenuous on the subject, it is not going to be affective because the subject is going to be tired and give up on the set goal.

Q2.

Chunking information is taking long strings of information that are hard for the brain to memorize and remember and transforming them into smaller, manageable bit of information. e.g 10 links on a website, grouping them into categories making it easier to access and remember what links lead to which areas of inquiry. One example of everyday chunking is things like phone numbers; 0430 12 4599 in chunks of 4-2-4.

George A. Miller formulated the Chunk Method in 1957 and said that working memory could hold seven (plus or minus two) chunks of information at once’ (Miller, 1956) this was further studied and then identified that not seven chunks of information could be held but more likely four or five bits of information could be held. Having said that if a persons working memory is already full it will be unable to retain anymore information, therefore you need to ‘chunk’ the information and put it in bit size pieces so that none of the information you are trying to demonstrate especially through design gets lost.

Four Steps to Chunking:

  1. Determine the importance of your content, going through to pick the most generalised topics through to the specific content that is more knowledge based. Then rank the importance of the content according to the use when considering the structure of your design and elements of the design.
  2. Dividing your hierarchy list into smaller related chunks, continue this so you come across a topic heading. Repeat for all of your content and you will have set groups that have topic headings.
  3. Organise you topic headings and groups so that they all come under the same topic or relating topic. This means that you will have all you heading that have sub-headings which lead to one specific topic of content. With design it is recommended that you stick to one topic for each heading otherwise it will lead the viewer to confusion and won’t be clear what you are trying to achieve. People like simplicity especially with design.
  4. This step is basically checking you chunks and seeing how necessary they are to your design, and if they are understandable if they are get rid of the access content.

Q3.

A study of psychology is crucial in the understanding and making of a affective design. When making a design you need to consider a persons psychology; how are they going to react to a use of specific colours or how and what negative/positive response is associated with the specific brand or ideologies you are going to be representing through this design. The making of a design is used to provoke a specific thought or response from a person whether it be advertising, to make someone buy a product or a poster to a horror film to make someone feel scared and shocked. The only way you can have these effects on people is to understand a broad spectrum of their psychology, I’m not saying that you need a degree in psychology to produce a successful design but you at least have to do some study into peoples psychologies to understand briefly what makes them feel/react certain ways.

References

Cooper, G. (2015). Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design at UNSW, 1-4. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.470.3428&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Learning Solutions Magazine,. (2015). Nuts and Bolts: Brain Bandwidth – Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design by Jane Bozarth : Learning Solutions Magazine. Retrieved 13 October 2015, from http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/498/nuts-and-bolts-brain-bandwidth—cognitive-load-theory-and-instructional-design

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Universal principles of design. Gloucester, Mass.: Rockport.
Malamed, C. (2009). Chunking Information for Instructional Design. Theelearningcoach.com. Retrieved 13 October 2015, from http://theelearningcoach.com/elearning_design/chunking-information/

Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043158

Plass, J., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tzanavari, A., & Tsapatsoulis, N. (2010). Affective, interactive and cognitive methods for e-learning design. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

Webstyleguide.com,. (2015). SITE DESIGN: “Chunking” information. Retrieved 13 October 2015, from http://webstyleguide.com/wsg2/site/chunk.html

Consistency: Week 2.

Q1. This article summarises that the usability of a design is easier when similar parts or elements are used, this is called Consistency. There are four types of consistency:

  1. Aesthetic Consistency:
    Aesthetic Consistency is the consistency of the appearance of a design ‘enhances recognition, communicates membership and sets emotional expectation.’ (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). This is the most common use of consistency in design, because it allows design easier usability and easier to learn for people in everyday life. The most common use of aesthetic consistency is logos and labels of specific brands. This makes product and brands easier to acknowledge for example when you see the Mac apple symbol you automatically know who designed it and how it is going to work based around other Mac products.
  2. Functional Consistency:
    Functional Consistency is the consistency of the meaning and action of a design ‘improves usability and learnability’ (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003) by using people knowledge of previous formats that are similar e.g. universal symbols (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). Functional consistency is used mostly in technology design where one symbol means one action, these symbol are then applied to a universal scale design where you know what symbol conducts which action.
  3. Internal Consistency:
    Internal Consistency is the consistency of other designs within the system e.g. signs within a park consistent with one another (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). This is the consistency that comes with bigger companies that implement simple yet identifying design elements in every store you may come across.
  4. External Consistency:
    External Consistency is the consistency of other elements in the environment. This means basically that universally if you have a company for example McDonalds that implements external consistency you are going to receive the same in store service and design elements regardless of what store you are going into, e.g. ‘The Golden Arches’.

Q2. Three Examples of Consistency in everyday life:

  1. Traffic Light: This demonstrates the elements of design because this design is used throughout the world and if recognisable to most people you will meet in the 21st They are consistent with colour, placing and how you read the symbols. Traffic lights works in a simple way that people of all mental capacities can understand – Red = STOP Orange = SLOW DOWN and Green = GO. These are just not used on the roads anymore they are used in trainings in companies, memes etc..
  2. Bunning’s Brand: This is not so world widely known since it is a Australian company but if you ask any Australian whether they are 10 or 70 they will know what you mean by: ‘let’s get a sausage sizzle on the weekend while we take a visit to Bunning’s.’ This is a great demonstration of external and internal consistency, these warehouses are nation wide known by their colour scheme (Red and Green) and there trademark symbol (Hammer) and also the service they bring to every store is similar nation wide. They implemented consistency to make there stores easily identified and successful in their field.
  3. Nike Brand: This clothing brand is so universally known because of its consistency. You will find on every piece of Nike merchandise the ‘Nike Tick’ this has been used as a consistent thread to identify Nike from other brands. It has a solid brand logo and also a solid brand catch phrase ‘Just Do It’ this means that it’s not just a clothing branch they are making Nike a lifestyle instead – if you where our clothes you will be able to just do it! The stores also follow similar colours and products to create an easier design for people to work around, plus using consistent styles of sneakers make them definable when someone is working along the streets in them, you know when someone is wearing Nike sneakers you don’t have to look three times you know what brand they are wearing.

References:

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Universal principles of design. Gloucester, Mass.: Rockport.

Week 1.

Aesthetic Usability.

Q1. This article outlines the Aesthetic Usability Effect. Aesthetic designs usually have conations of being easy to use and learn how to use whereas less aesthetic designs usually have conations of being hard to use and people don’t really bother diving into getting to understand the design because they have lost focus already. It argues that people perceive more aesthetic designs as easier to use and understand compared to less aesthetic designs. The article uses examples to back the base argument such as experiments, charts and facts this is easy for the reader to understand and absorb the knowledge. One example that this article uses is Nokia, they think this is a ‘pioneering example that the more aesthetic the design the easier it is to use.’ (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). Nokia was one of the companies to identify that cell phones weren’t just for a practical use they could be used for other things like texting and games this then lead the way to creating cell phones we see today with so many different wonderful features including: cameras, games, music, instagram…. On the other side of the argument they use VCR as a poor use of aesthetic design, the controls and times are very confusing for the user to understand and make it difficult to use and to remember how to use which is the key elements people look for in design. In web design it is key to make your reader/users engaged and wanting to stay on the screen because it isn’t just a page that has lots of wordy writing it has different colours, banners, pictures and is broken up into understandable chunks. Positive results with a design create positive reactions from people and negative results from a deisgn create negative reactions. This is why it is crucial to create a good first positive response from a design otherwise it isn’t going to succeed in being a popular and well-known design.

Q2. Three Examples:

  1. aestheticdesign.co;
    This website is a warm and inviting place that grabs a user into understanding and wanting to understand more. Because they use a synced and aesthetically pleasing design. They use calming and warm colours that don’t attack all your senses at once, a nice peaceful font that make it easier to read than bold italic crazy fonts that take away from the actual purpose of the website. It’s links all have the same format to them so you don’t have to chop and change whenever you turn onto a new link, you know where you are and what website you’re on. This clearly demonstrates how the use of a good aesthetic design helps people instead of cripples people.
  2. Instagram:
    Instagram has become one of the most popular apps of this decade because it has an easy and aesthetic design. Instagrams design in synced and well understandable, it marks likes and comments in orange and has a blue and grey border. It connects people in a fun and very now way. I think the thing that attracts people most is how you can see what celebrities are doing whether you like Kylie Jenner or Jared Leto. It acts as such a good example of aesthetic design that connects people.
  3. iPhone:
    The iPhone is hands down the most popular phone of this decade. It has marked the coming of age of the tablet phones. This is because it has an aesthetic design, it is easily accessible and lets be honest it looks pretty cool as well which attracts people to it. It has opened the world up in so many different ways with its intricate and well-known design. You could look at any Mac product and know how to use it even in a basic form and know what brand it was from. It demonstrates such a worldwide example of how aesthetic design triumphs over any less aesthetic design whether the other designs have better elements, everyone wants to be on the iPhone trend.

    References:
    Captovate.com.au,. (2013). The Aesthetic Usability Effect – it’s design magic!. Retrieved 1 November 2015, from http://www.captovate.com.au/blog/aesthetic-usability-effect-its-design-magic

    Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Universal principles of design. Gloucester, Mass.: Rockport.