Switch Designs Already

       The two light switches (pictured above; one is hiding due to being painted over) and the fan knob have poor mapping. The fan knob (above the switch plate) also has poor control signifiers. Norman states that "[b]asic switches and controls should be relatively simple to design well. But there are two fundamental difficulties. The first is to determine what type of device they control....The second is the mapping problem...." The light switches have poor mapping because the light switches on the far left do not turn on the lights on the left side of the room. The same goes for the light switches on the right. Also, since there are two light switches, a user does not know which panel is for the room and which one controls the lights outside. The lights in my house also have a constraint, not allowing the user to make the lights brighter or darker through a dimmer. The fan has poor mapping because it appears as though it is a dimmer for one of the lights due to it's proximity to the light switch plate. Norman mentions that the closer objects are to one another, the more likely a user thinks the controls are related. The fan knob has poor control signifiers because a user cannot tell that it turns on the fan and it doesn't display a signifier that tells the user how to make the fan go faster.
       There are a few solutions to the light switch and knob usability problem. One way that the knob could be more usable is by putting a picture of a fan on the plate that tells the user how to make the fan go faster. This signifier would also let the user know that the knob controls a fan. The designer could have eliminated the constraint of only being able to start at a slow speed by allowing the knob to turn left from the starting position. The light switch mapping could be fixed by what Norman did in his home by having a box-like figure come out of the wall. However, another solution that would make the lights more usable for the user would be to place signifiers under the light switches or just make sure that the switches on the left side of the panel turn on the lights that are farthest left in the room and the light switches on the right side of the panel turn the lights on in the right side of the room. The light switches should go in the order in which the lights are placed in the room so mapping is afforded.

Is It Going to Stop?

       As I was walking out of my sociology class, I noticed a student getting a drink from the water fountain. When he was finished, he began to head for the door to go down the steps, but the water fountain continued to run. Noticing that the water fountain didn't shut off, the young man came back to the fountain to see if there was something abnormal about the drinking system. When the student arrived back at the water fountain, the water stopped flowing out of the system. Due to the poor design of the fountain, when the side push bars are released, water continues to flow for an extra three seconds.
       This design does not follow a user's mental model. A user would think that as soon as the bars are released, water would no longer flow from the fountain. If the water would stop, this would provide feedback to the user that they have, in fact, released the side push bars completely. When the student used the fountain, the Gulf of Execution was relatively smooth; however, when it came to the Gulf of Evaluation, the student did not know what was happening with the water fountain. On the water fountain there are good signifiers; the gray bars tell the user where to push. The mapping is also done relatively well by placing the gray bars on the sides where a person would normally want to push; this is Human-Centered Design. This water fountain also can be applied to the principle of "knowledge in the head" and "knowledge in the world." People often see others using a water fountain and learn from this; however, if a user never saw someone use a water fountain, he or she would most likely still be able to use it.
       While this water fountain has some positive design features, there are some design features that should be changed. In order to make this water fountain more usable, the gray bar could come the whole way around the water fountain; this way if someone had objects in there hands and still wanted a drink, the user could push the front and water would still flow from the fountain. The water fountain should also stop immediately after the gray bars are released, for this would provide better feedback to the user.

Stove Top Almost Burns down Home

       A few weeks ago, I almost burnt my house down while trying to make tea. I turned the stove on using the knob in which I thought coordinated to the correct burner. I went upstairs to fold my laundry and continued to listen for the whistle of the tea pot. A few minutes later, I remembered that I was trying to make tea, but didn't hear the whistle. I came downstairs to find a burner that was bright red and the tea pot sitting on a different burner; luckily, my house did not burn down. There were two pieces of feedback/lack of feedback in the above story. The thing that lacked feedback, is the tea pot; if the tea pot was boiling, there would be a feedback of a whistling sound. One piece of feedback that allowed me to know which burner was on was the redness of the burner. Unfortunately, there wasn't a type of feedback to tell me that I turned on the wrong burner.
       If this stove was better designed, the risk of fire would be reduced. There are many problems with the layout of the stove. The knobs that turn on the burners are on the other side of the stove, meaning that when you reach to turn the burner off, you could potentially get burnt by a tall pot or light your shirt on fire. Another problem with this system is that the diagram of the knobs does not signify whether the burner being turned on is a large or small one. Also, the knobs give a signifier of "front" and "rear" to the user; however, how are you supposed to know what is the front of the stove and what is the back when the knobs are on the back of the stove, not the front? While the knobs do afford the mapping of the burners, there are many ways in which this stove could be improved.
       According to Norman, many stoves have bad mapping. The mapping of my stove was different than the ones that Norman used for examples; in fact, my stove actually may be the most natural of all the examples he provided. However, one way this stove could be improved is by signifying whether a knob turns on a large or small burner, instead of just showing four dots with one filled in. In order to make the stove "fire proof," companies could put a constraint on a stove that would not allow a burner to get hot unless there was weight applied to the burner. Also, the stove could use colored lights next to each burner to signify what burner is on and which ones are off.

Corn Sheller: Where to Now?

       Do you know what type of system this is? This is a corn sheller. Did you picture this as your mental model? Probably not. There are many design and usability problems with this piece of equipment. First off, there is no signifier telling the user whether to stick the ear of corn in the top of the system or in the side. Another problem with the corn sheller is that the corn kernels come out where a person is cranking the machine, creating obstruction between the bucket that catches the kernels and the cranking handle. Another issue with the corn sheller is that the ear is stuck in the top and the cob comes out the opposite side, making this system near to impossible for one person to operate. Saying this, this system has poor affordances.
       This system also has poor mapping, for the user does not know how to operate the piece of equipment without instruction from a previous user. One way this system could have better mapping and use signifiers would be to use arrows and images on the system pointing to what happens inside of the system. This system could afford better usability by placing the spout that the kernels come out of on the opposite side so that the bucket catching the kernels would not get in the way. While this system is not designed very well, the feedback the system provides is realatively good. The user knows that they are using the piece of equipment correctly when they see kernels coming out the spout, otherwise, something is wrong.

Stationary Bike Does Not Pass Inspection

       This stationary bicycle on the lower left side of the page is what many people would see as their mental model of a stationary bike. However, take a closer look at the top right image. While riding this bicycle, I wanted to adjust the handles so that they are closer to my body, which would allow me to ride the bicycle and hold on without bending over and hurting my back. However, this is as close to me as the handle bars would go. But doesn't it appear that the handles could be moved closer to me since there is still one more hole? Well, that's what I thought until I realized that the metal piece with the knob is not attached to the the handles and is just there to help hold the metal bar that goes through it. So, if I would want to push the handle bars farther out I could, but then they would be even less usable for me as a rider. Another problem with this bike is that in order to adjust certain parts, the rider has to stop cycling and get off.
       First, let me offer some some insight and basic solutions to the handle bar problem. While I understand that racing bicycle enthusiasts ride crunched over, I believe the designer should have allowed the bar to come closer to the rider for those who use the bike leisurely. The designer also should have not made the metal piece appear to be attached to the handles, which makes the rider think that the handle bars could be moved closer to the body when in fact, they can't be. By using Human-Centered Design, I could find a solution to this problem. I would make the handles and the metal piece with the knob connected; this would reduce errors and allow for the user to move the handles forward and back with ease. In The Design of Everyday Things by Don Norman, Norman explains that when creating designs, designers should focus on the "physical anthropometry" of the object; that is, making the object usable for people of all sizes. I believe one way of doing this and solving the problem of having to stop cycling to adjust certain features would be to have electronic controls connected to the handle bars that could control the seat and handle bar positioning. While I just named a few improvements that this bicycle should have, designers could use Human-Centered Design and test the object on subjects to make a product that is the more usable.