I felt that the title “Attractive things work better” was quite mismatched to the actual content of the text. Norman discussed how pleasurable designs are not necessarily usable. Subsequently, I find the title confusing as it contradicts what Norman said about the tensions that exist between attractive design and usability. Also, according to the title, I expected that the article would demonstrate how attractive design works better. Rather, he demonstrated how attractive design is more important in some situations than others (ex. high stress situation versus low stress situation). He didn’t explicitly explain how attractive design works better, or what he meant by attractive design. Is ‘attractive’ inclusive of beauty and usability? He simply kept repeating the idea that attractive things work better without offering a sound reasoning as to why that is the case. Although he made interesting claims about how negative and positive affects one’s mindset, and the relationship between design and neuroscience, I found his arguments to be underdeveloped. It was interesting information, but it wasn’t delivered coherently.