Read The Design of Everyday Things Online
Authors: Don Norman
      Â
â¢
 Â
What dimension of control affects the temperature?
      Â
â¢
 Â
Which direction along that dimension means hotter?
      Â
â¢
 Â
What dimension of control affects the rate of flow?
      Â
â¢
 Â
Which direction along that dimension means more?
In the name of elegance, the moving parts sometimes meld invisibly into the faucet structure, making it nearly impossible even to find the controls, let alone figure out which way they move or what they control. And then, different faucet designs use different solutions. One-control faucets ought to be superior because they control the psychological variables of interest. But because of the lack of standardization and awkward design (to call it “awkward” is being kind), they frustrate many people so much that they tend to be disliked more than they are admired.
Bath and kitchen faucet design ought to be simple, but can violate many design principles, including:
      Â
â¢
 Â
Visible affordances and signifiers
      Â
â¢
 Â
Discoverability
      Â
â¢
 Â
Immediacy of feedback
Finally, many violate the principle of desperation:
      Â
â¢
 Â
If all else fails, standardize.
Standardization is indeed the fundamental principle of desperation: when no other solution appears possible, simply design everything the same way, so people only have to learn once. If all makers of faucets could agree on a standard set of motions to control amount and temperature (how about up and down to control amountâup meaning increaseâand left and right to control temperature, left meaning hot?), then we could all learn the standards once, and forever afterward use the knowledge for every new faucet we encountered.
If you can't put the knowledge on the device (that is, knowledge in the world), then develop a cultural constraint: standardize what has to be kept in the head. And remember the lesson from faucet rotation on
page 153
: The standards should reflect the psychological conceptual models, not the physical mechanics.
Standards simplify life for everyone. At the same time, they tend to hinder future development. And, as discussed in
Chapter 6
, there are often difficult political struggles in finding common agreement. Nonetheless, when all else fails, standards are the way to proceed.
Sometimes everything that is needed cannot be made visible. Enter sound: sound can provide information available in no other way. Sound can tell us that things are working properly or that they need maintenance or repair. It can even save us from accidents. Consider the information provided by:
      Â
â¢
 Â
The click when the bolt on a door slides home
      Â
â¢
 Â
The tinny sound when a door doesn't shut right
      Â
â¢
 Â
The roaring sound when a car muffler gets a hole
      Â
â¢
 Â
The rattle when things aren't secured
      Â
â¢
 Â
The whistle of a teakettle when the water boils
      Â
â¢
 Â
The click when the toast pops up
      Â
â¢
 Â
The increase in pitch when a vacuum cleaner gets clogged
      Â
â¢
 Â
The indescribable change in sound when a complex piece of machinery starts to have problems
Many devices simply beep and burp. These are not naturalistic sounds; they do not convey hidden information. When used properly, a beep can assure you that you've pressed a button, but the sound is as annoying as informative. Sounds should be generated so as to give knowledge about the source. They should convey something about the actions that are taking place, actions that matter to the user but that would otherwise not be visible. The buzzes, clicks, and hums that you hear while a telephone call is being completed are one good example: take out those noises and you are less certain that the connection is being made.
Real,
natural sound is as essential as visual information because sound tells us about things we can't see, and it does so while our eyes are occupied elsewhere. Natural sounds reflect the complex interaction of natural objects: the way one part moves against another; the material of which the parts are madeâhollow or solid, metal or wood, soft or hard, rough or smooth. Sounds are generated when materials interact, and the sound tells us whether they are hitting, sliding, breaking, tearing, crumbling, or bouncing. Experienced mechanics can diagnosis the condition of machinery just by listening. When sounds are generated artificially, if intelligently created using a rich auditory spectrum, with care to provide the subtle cues that are informative without being annoying, they can be as useful as sounds in the real world.
Sound is tricky. It can annoy and distract as easily as it can aid. Sounds that at one's first encounter are pleasant or cute easily become annoying rather than useful. One of the virtues of sounds is that they can be detected even when attention is applied elsewhere. But this virtue is also a deficit, for sounds are often intrusive. Sounds are difficult to keep private unless the intensity is low or earphones are used. This means both that neighbors may be
annoyed and that others can monitor your activities. The use of sound to convey knowledge is a powerful and important idea, but still in its infancy.
Just as the presence of sound can serve a useful role in providing feedback about events, the absence of sound can lead to the same kinds of difficulties we have already encountered from a lack of feedback. The absence of sound can mean an absence of knowledge, and if feedback from an action is expected to come from sound, silence can lead to problems.
WHEN SILENCE KILLS
It was a pleasant June day in Munich, Germany. I was picked up at my hotel and driven to the country with farmland on either side of the narrow, two-lane road. Occasional walkers strode by, and every so often a bicyclist passed. We parked the car on the shoulder of the road and joined a group of people looking up and down the road. “Okay, get ready,” I was told. “Close your eyes and listen.” I did so and about a minute later I heard a high-pitched whine, accompanied by a low humming sound: an automobile was approaching. As it came closer, I could hear tire noise. After the car had passed, I was asked my judgment of the sound. We repeated the exercise numerous times, and each time the sound was different. What was going on? We were evaluating sound designs for BMW's new electric vehicles.
Electric cars are extremely quiet. The only sounds they make come from the tires, the air, and occasionally, from the high-pitched whine of the electronics. Car lovers really like the silence. Pedestrians have mixed feelings, but the blind are greatly concerned. After all, the blind cross streets in traffic by relying upon the sounds of vehicles. That's how they know when it is safe to cross. And what is true for the blind might also be true for anyone stepping onto the street while distracted. If the vehicles don't make any sounds, they can kill. The United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration determined that pedestrians are considerably more likely to be hit by hybrid or electric vehicles than by those that have an internal combustion engine. The greatest danger is
when the hybrid or electric vehicles are moving slowly, when they are almost completely silent. The sounds of an automobile are important signifiers of its presence.
Adding sound to a vehicle to warn pedestrians is not a new idea. For many years, commercial trucks and construction equipment have had to make beeping sounds when backing up. Horns are required by law, presumably so that drivers can use them to alert pedestrians and other drivers when the need arises, although they are often used as a way of venting anger and rage instead. But adding a continuous sound to a normal vehicle because it would otherwise be too quiet, is a challenge.
What sound would you want? One group of blind people suggested putting some rocks into the hubcaps. I thought this was brilliant. The rocks would provide a natural set of cues, rich in meaning yet easy to interpret. The car would be quiet until the wheels started to turn. Then, the rocks would make natural, continuous scraping sounds at low speeds, change to the pitter-patter of falling stones at higher speeds, the frequency of the drops increasing with the speed of the car until the car was moving fast enough that the rocks would be frozen against the circumference of the rim, silent. Which is fine: the sounds are not needed for fast-moving vehicles because then the tire noise is audible. The lack of sound when the vehicle was not moving would be a problem, however.
The marketing divisions of automobile manufacturers thought that the addition of artificial sounds would be a wonderful branding opportunity, so each car brand or model should have its own unique sound that captured just the car personality the brand wished to convey. Porsche added loudspeakers to its electric car prototype to give it the same “throaty growl” as its gasoline-powered cars. Nissan wondered whether a hybrid automobile should sound like tweeting birds. Some manufacturers thought all cars should sound the same, with standardized sounds and sound levels, making it easier for everyone to learn how to interpret them. Some blind people thought they should sound like carsâyou know, gasoline engines, following the old tradition that new technologies must always copy the old.
Skeuomorphic
is the technical term for incorporating old, familiar ideas into new technologies, even though they no longer play a functional role. Skeuomorphic designs are often comfortable for traditionalists, and indeed the history of technology shows that new technologies and materials often slavishly imitate the old for no apparent reason except that is what people know how to do. Early automobiles looked like horse-driven carriages without the horses (which is also why they were called horseless carriages); early plastics were designed to look like wood; folders in computer file systems often look the same as paper folders, complete with tabs. One way of overcoming the fear of the new is to make it look like the old. This practice is decried by design purists, but in fact, it has its benefits in easing the transition from the old to the new. It gives comfort and makes learning easier. Existing conceptual models need only be modified rather than replaced. Eventually, new forms emerge that have no relationship to the old, but the skeuomorphic designs probably helped the transition.
When it came to deciding what sounds the new silent automobiles should generate, those who wanted differentiation ruled the day, yet everyone also agreed that there had to be some standards. It should be possible to determine that the sound is coming from an automobile, to identify its location, direction, and speed. No sound would be necessary once the car was going fast enough, in part because tire noise would be sufficient. Some standardization would be required, although with a lot of leeway. International standards committees started their procedures. Various countries, unhappy with the normally glacial speed of standards agreements and under pressure from their communities, started drafting legislation. Companies scurried to develop appropriate sounds, hiring experts in psychoacoustics, psychologists, and Hollywood sound designers.
The United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a set of principles along with a detailed list of requirements, including sound levels, spectra, and other criteria. The full document is 248 pages. The document states:
         Â
This standard will ensure that blind, visually-impaired, and other pedestrians are able to detect and recognize nearby hybrid and
electric vehicles by requiring that hybrid and electric vehicles emit sound that pedestrians will be able to hear in a range of ambient environments and contain acoustic signal content that pedestrians will recognize as being emitted from a vehicle. The proposed standard establishes minimum sound requirements for hybrid and electric vehicles when operating under 30 kilometers per hour (km/h) (18 mph), when the vehicle's starting system is activated but the vehicle is stationary, and when the vehicle is operating in reverse. The agency chose a crossover speed of 30 km/h because this was the speed at which the sound levels of the hybrid and electric vehicles measured by the agency approximated the sound levels produced by similar internal combustion engine vehicles
. (Department of Transportation, 2013.)
As I write this, sound designers are still experimenting. The automobile companies, lawmakers, and standards committees are still at work. Standards are not expected until 2014 or later, and then it will take considerable time to be deployed to the millions of vehicles across the world.
What principles should be used for the design sounds of electric vehicles (including hybrids)? The sounds have to meet several criteria:
      Â
â¢
 Â
Alerting.
The sound will indicate the presence of an electric vehicle.
      Â
â¢
 Â
Orientation.
The sound will make it possible to determine where the vehicle is located, a rough idea of its speed, and whether it is moving toward or away from the listener.