The Psychopathology of Everyday Things – Response

The glass door with no markings that indicate where to push, the sliding door that could be a push door or a pull door, the sink that is impossible to empty… all of those spectacular design failures are common objects in our daily lives. The awkward interactions and experience with this kind of objects are too familiar to me. I do not have to leave my dorm to find examples. Every student dorm on campus has a drawer with three drawer boxes. On my move-in day, two of my roommates and I spent almost an hour trying to figure out how to open one of the drawer boxes until we broke it by trying to force open it. It took me an entire semester until someone told me the secret:  “you have to have all drawers completely shut before you open any drawer”. I sometimes use it as a joke to mock how “stupid” I can be sometimes. However, I completely agree with the author’s view here: if only “smart” people can figure out how to work something but not the majority “stupid” people, then the design of that thing is at fault, not the people. It is the duty of machines and those who design them to understand people. It is not our duty to understand the arbitrary, meaningless dictates of machines. Designers need to focus on the experience of people who are completely clueless rather than people who had experience interacting with similar mechanisms before.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *