The book "100 NEW Main Design Principles"

The doctor of psychological sciences Susan Wainshank wrote the continuation of her legendary best-selling book “100 Main Principles of Design”, using the latest discoveries in the field of psychology, neuropsychology, brain research and social psychology. Since the release of the first book, research has appeared that gives the designer new challenges. "100 new main principles of design" continue to reveal the secrets of psychology, neurophysiology and brain research and offer you concise practical advice that will allow you to create a comfortable and attractive design that meets the unconscious demands of people.

Learn how to improve the performance of your websites, applications, design and products by finding answers to the following questions in your book:
• How to interest the viewer with a commercial?
• How much text on the screen are people willing to read?
• How to increase the credibility of your content with one simple method?
• When is it better not to give the audience a choice?
• Why does laughter help teach children?
• Do fonts make information easier to read?
• In what place of the screen of the smartphone can not place the menu?
• How does the human brain process large amounts of data?


We offer to get acquainted with a passage from the book.

Homophones can predetermine behavior

Alas, today again you have to work late. The report must be submitted tomorrow morning, but it is not even half finished, so you are sitting in your office and trying to bring it to mind.
')
At some point, you decide that it is time to relax, and open one of your favorite blogs. You are reading the post of a famous English journalist who is going to go on a long journey. For the time being, he says goodbye to his subscribers and ends the post with the word “Bye!” - “Goodbye”. Below on the page you see an announcement announcing the release of a new book by the author, under which there is a button “Buy now” - “Buy now”. You press a button and buy a book.

Then you skim through the news site and see the title: “Is the Fed Chairman Right?” - “Is the Fed Chairman right?” Suddenly, you realize that it is too late, and the report is still not written. And back to work.

Were your actions during the break "predetermined"?

The so-called effect of precedence, or priming, is a situation where the effect of one stimulus predetermines the response to other stimuli. In the example above, the word “Bye” (first stimulus) at the end of the read message from the blog affected you. This is what caused you to react to the second stimulus - the “Buy” homophone in the inscription on the button.

But that is not all. You were affected by the word “Right” (another stimulus) in the news headline. A “write” homophone appeared in my head (the last stimulus), prompting us to recall the need to write (“write”) a report.

Predestination action through homophones

Priming has long been known to psychologists and marketers. But the effect of homophones in this effect was discovered quite recently.
Omophones are words that sound the same, but are spelled differently and have different meanings. In English, homophones are much more common than in Russian, since they have arisen as a result of a historically different designation in writing the same consonant or vowel sound. Here are some examples:

Bye / buy (bye / buy)
Write / right (write / right)
Carrot / carat (carrot / carat)
Air / heir (air / heir)
Brake / break (brake / break)
Cell / sell (cell / sell)
Cereal / serial (grain / serial)
Coarse / course (unprocessed / course)
Fair / fare (fair / fare)
Know / no (know / no)
One / won (one / won)
Profit / prophet (profit / prophet)

Derek Davis and Paul Gerr (Davis & Herr, 2014) studied whether homophones can predetermine subsequent behavior. In the case of positive test results, they were going to find out how strong this influence is and under what conditions it occurs. Scientists have suggested that one homophone can recall the meaning of another, and that is what will affect behavior. Roughly speaking, the word “bye” in an English-speaking person increases the likelihood of a reaction to a call for purchase.

Mental Speech Reading

In the process of reading, we, as a rule, mentally pronounce the words. This phenomenon is called subvocalization. This pronouncement activates word-related memories. Reading the word "bye" is associated with a farewell scene or departure, for example, on a trip. But since people at the same time say this word to themselves, Davis and Herr suggested that there could be an association with the “buy” homophone, which remains in memory for some time. Since the predestination behavior of homophones is based on sub-vocalization, the overall effect will vary depending on the language.

Suppress the effect of homophones

Studies of reading have shown that in most cases people automatically, unconsciously, suppress associations caused by homophones. The more a person reads, the more actively this suppression occurs. So if you read a lot, you are most likely less susceptible to the predetermined behavior caused by homophones. But susceptibility may increase in case of high cognitive load.

No sub-vocalization with fast reading

Even those who did not attend the fast reading courses could hear that mental speaking slows down the reading process. Do not confuse lip movement with subvocalization. The movements of the lips can slow down the process of reading, but everyone practice mental speaking (without making sounds or making movements). The reason, in the context of the influence of homophones, is not the lack of sub-vocalization in many people reading. It’s just that these people are less likely to have automatic associations related to homophones.

Cognitive load trap

Suppressing the effect of homophones requires some cognitive activity. This means that as you do more mental work — that is, as your cognitive load increases — your susceptibility to the effect of homophones on behavior increases.

Let us return to the situation considered at the beginning of the chapter. A person working late at night, because by morning he needs to give a finished report, most likely, is experiencing a strong cognitive load. This is what made him susceptible to the effects of bye / buy homophones.

Impact of built-in homophones

Davis and Herr studied the effects of built-in homophone, such as “goodbye” and “bye” or “good buy” (good buy). It turned out that the built-in homophones have the same effect on subsequent behavior as the usual ones.

The influence of homophones is not realized.

In the studies of Davis and Guerra, 860 people were tested. None of them understood that his behavior turned out to be predetermined homophones.

Sometimes the effect of homophones depends on their order.

Homophones activate each other, usually when they are both commonly used (buy / bye). If one of the words in the pair is specialized (you / ewe are you / sheep), the order of occurrence will affect the activation. If the word “you” appears first, only a farmer specializing in sheep breeding will be associated with “ewe”. But the word "ewe" may well activate the association with the word "you."

Ethical problem

In this case, the designer gets an ethical choice. Do you want to encourage people to perform any actions with the help of homophones? Will you complete a blog post or an article on the site with the word “bye”, placing the word “buy” next to it in a completely different context? Will you add cognitive load to behavioral homophones on your page to increase reader perception? Should I include this information in the book, because it can be used to make people act in the interests of others?

I am often asked questions about the ethics of my work, because most of the research I have covered is about how people can be made to take action. I thought a lot on this topic, but I still haven’t found an unequivocal answer. The main question is: “If we use the information obtained in the study of behavioral reactions to get people to perform the actions we need, is this not an open manipulation? Is it ethical? ”

Some people believe that it is unethical to force people to take any action regardless of the circumstances. But you can look at the question from the other side. In the case of effects that bring a person benefits (more healthy food, stopping smoking), manipulations are quite acceptable. My point of view lies somewhere in the middle between these approaches.

The research that I am talking about and writing is an extremely powerful tool. But not infinitely powerful. None of the described effects and methods gives complete control over people. And it seems to me that every designer must decide for himself where the line between influence and ethics is. This decision point will accompany you in all projects. I can only share my thoughts on this topic.

I do not quite agree with those who argue that manipulation techniques are acceptable when it is necessary to change the behavior associated with eating habits, smoking or energy conservation - in the end, this will have a positive impact on the lives of both individuals and society as a whole - but it is unacceptable to use them to force a person to buy a new refrigerator. Attempting to change the behavior in all cases will remain an attempt to change the behavior.

The US government invited me as an expert in investigating cases of fraud on the web. It was then that I got the idea of ​​where the line between ethical and unethical behavior lies. To present your product or service from the best side and to bring this product or service in accordance with the needs and desires of customers is quite acceptable. Does every person need a new fridge? Most likely no. But why not contribute to the fact that the purchase was made right now and right at your place? So you can get to the unethical advertising and marketing in general. Although, of course, there are people who adhere to just this point of view!

But the truly unacceptable is the deliberate deception of users, giving them confusing instructions that make it difficult to understand exactly what they agree with, calls for action that may be harmful, or attempts to force a person to break the law.

It is interesting to note that the influence of homophones on the behavior turns out to be exactly halfway between the two poles of the spectrum considered. Therefore, in my work, I never use homophones to force users to the actions I need.

But, as has already been said, you should work out your own opinion on this problem.

findings

• Homophones allow you to influence people's behavior.
• To increase the impact of homophones, increase your cognitive load.
• People do not realize how homophones affect their behavior. Consider how ethical it is to use this technique.

People read only 60% of the article.

Unless, of course, they read it at all.

Click - does not mean read

Tony Hale, head of real-time web analytics at Chartbeat, explored a wealth of data on people's behavior on the Internet (Haile, 2014).

In the world of advertising for a long time, the main criterion was considered the number of transitions. Huge sums of money passed from hand to hand thanks to the payment of clicks and the determination of the number of views - both of these parameters were the criteria for the success of advertising placed on the Web. Hale also proved the incorrectness of these criteria.

He studied almost two billion Internet interactions, most of which were related to articles and news sites. And it turned out that in 55% of cases, people spend on the page less than 15 seconds. That is, they simply do not read news articles.

Chartbeat data processing specialist Josh Schwartz analyzed the scrollbar usage statistics on article pages. It turned out that most visitors view about 60% of the material. 10% do not use scrolling at all, that is, most of the article remains unread.

Hyle explains that you should focus not on the number of transitions, but on how much attention the audience gives to the material and how often people return to the page.

Some organizations, such as the Upworthy Media Resource, have begun to use the new “attention minutes” metric: the total time people spend on the site, reading materials and paying attention to their individual parts.

Share does not mean read

Another popular feature is the ability to share content on social networks. It is assumed that once a person shares an article, for example, on Facebook, links to it on Twitter or mentions it in his post on LinkedIn, he read it completely. At the same time, there is no special connection between publication and reading. Read to the end of the article does not necessarily be published. At the same time, those articles, links to which appear in social networks, are rarely read by more than 60%.

According to Adrian Jeffreys (2014), such popular news companies as Buzzfeed and Upworthy report that a maximum of tweets appear after reading 25% of the article and after completing the reading. Between these two points, links to the material are given quite infrequently.

findings

• Do not think that people read articles entirely.
• The most important information should be located in the first half of the article.
• If you want people to share your article on social networks, remind them of this opportunity after the first quarter of the material, and then at the end.
• Do not expect that the person who shared your article on the social network read it at least partially.

Reading on the Internet is not always real reading.

Listing the basic principles of design, I often mention that technologies change much faster than people. Over billions of years of evolution, the eyes, ears and brain of man have found the best ways to function. And they can hardly be quickly changed.

This statement is true for most methods. But there are exceptions. Such an exception is the ability to read. Because it is not innate, as opposed to the ability to walk or talk, but an acquired skill. The brain of every person learns to read independently.

Marianna Wolff, head of the Center for Reading and Research in Tufts University, wrote the book Proust and Squid: History and Science of the Reading Brain (Proust and the Squid). In it, the author claims that the human brain was not intended to be read. This is something that people learn, and, interestingly, our brain can read in different ways.

Neuroplasticity and reading

During the life of a person, his brain changes. This phenomenon is called neuroplasticity. The brain rebuilds itself. New neural connections are formed, individual functions begin to appear in different parts of the brain. All this is a reaction to the environment and to the daily actions of man. Learning to read also makes the brain change.

To some extent, the changes that occur in the process of learning to read are the same, regardless of the language. Kimihiro Nakamura (Nakamura, 2012) compared MRI scans of the brain activity of people who learned to read French and Chinese. It turned out that in both cases two neural systems work. One recognizes the image of the word, and the second assesses the physical movements with which the signs are applied to the page.

Of course, for different languages ​​the nature of the activity is somewhat different. For example, readers in Chinese had a high level of activity in brain areas responsible for processing gestures. But no matter what language a person reads, in the process of learning to read his brain changes. As Wolff points out, parts of the brain that were originally programmed for other tasks — for example, shape recognition, speech, or gestures — create new neural connections while learning to read.

Quick view and scan as an alternative to reading

If we compare the traditional process of reading (no matter what book: electronic or paper, novel or scientific literature) and the process of searching for information on the Web, we will see that in these cases different parts of the brain are involved.

A person who is focused on reading thinks differently. A thoughtful reader practices what Wolf calls "deep reading." Such people think in the process of reading. They mentally associate the read with their own experiences. Express new ideas. Go beyond the limits written by the author with the help of interpretations and analysis. They get an internal experience.

Quick viewing and text scanning is another experience. Not worse, but just different. More visual attention is given to a quick scan. Information is much less absorbed. This is an external experience. And the difference between deep and fluent reading is visible on the brain scans.

Design with a cursory reading

If the product you are developing involves reading the text, you most likely already know that many users do not read the text that appears on the screen. You are aware of the need to break the text into small fragments and use headings. These principles have long been adopted as the best way to publish text on the Internet. But I would like to offer you a more radical than usual view of the problem.

What is reading

According to the results of new research of deep reading, a quick look and scan, I recommend not considering the actions of people visiting the site or downloading an article as reading. The exception in this case will only read e-books.

I propose the following definition of the term "reading":

A situation when a person is in a practically stationary position and reads text from paper or digital media, without being distracted by extraneous things on the page or in the external environment. In this case, the only interaction with an electronic device or a book is to go to the next or previous page, and this state is maintained for at least 5 minutes. Only in this case, we can talk about reading.

All other actions, including word processing on the screen or page, refer to a quick scan or scan.

Design for fluent reading and scanning

Most people designing websites, applications, and other products do not intend them to be read in the sense described above. A quick look and scan on brain snapshots are different from reading. This is an external experience, which is based on visual attention.

Accordingly, it should be taken into account that people will not ponder over what is written, most likely they will read only a small fragment, skipping most of it, and will not waste their time on interpreting and analyzing information.

The type of reading changes = the brain changes

Another consideration: in some situations, people just skim through the information, while in others, thoughtful reading turns out to be preferable. It's great that our brain is plastic enough to master both types of reading and, if necessary, switch from one to the other.

Such switching is easily accomplished by people who have been taught to read thoughtfully since childhood, and later they have mastered the fluent reading technique. But will it not turn out that new generations are not threatened to learn thoughtful reading from young nails? Wouldn't they first learn to scan and scan, and then read? And never master the process of thoughtful reading?

Wolf assumes that, since brain reorganization changes the way of thinking, these changes can seriously and unpredictably affect how people interact with information. Will people not reach the state when the information being read will not be analyzed at all, because in fact it is only briefly scanned and scanned? Will they not be in a situation where internal experience, which can be expressed in words, is simply absent?

findings

• Most likely, all your web-published text will be scanned and scanned, so use the following rules: break the information into small pieces and add headings.
• Do not hope that people “read” texts on the Internet.
• Do not expect people to understand or remember the text on the Internet.
• Minimize the amount of text used on the Internet.

More information about the book can be found on the publisher's website.
Table of contents
Excerpt

For Habrozhiteley a 25% discount on the coupon - Wayneshenk