OUGD501 - SB1 - Essay Research Sources and Notes

• People spend more time with products that they find beautiful, and they claim they are easier to use. The products seem to function better because they are beautiful.

• Human beings have an attractiveness bias; we perceive beautiful things as being better, regardless of whether they actually are better. All else being equal, we prefer beautiful things, and we believe beautiful things function better. As in nature, function can follow form.

• Most marketers knows that our purchasing decisions are based primarily on emotion. We use logic to rationalize those decisions. We are emotional beings. Aesthetics influence our opinions of products, and we typically find aesthetically pleasing products to be more effective simply by virtue of their aesthetic appeal.

• “Function alone does not drive form. Form evolves from the holistic forces of the project—audience needs, client desires, ethical obligations, aesthetic inclinations, material properties, cultural presuppositions, and yes, functional requirements.

• “For working designers, “every force evolves a form” is a more useful rule. The design process actually begins with something that doesn’t yet exist but needs to exist, and it moves forward toward a formal result. Function alone doesn’t drive the resultant form. The form evolves from the holistic forces of the project—audience needs, client desires, ethical obligations, aesthetic inclinations, material properties, cultural presuppositions, and yes, functional requirements. “Function” is rightly seen as a single, isolated, quantifiable aspect of the overall “force” driving the form.”

• From a utilitarian perspective, the "form follows function" rule doesn't inherently lead to good design.

• The real "art" of design lies not only in accurately assessing the functional requirements of a project (the easy part), but also in developing the forms most suitable to those requirements (the tricky part). A better, less tautological mantra comes from Mother Ann Lee (1736–84), founder of the Shaker movement in America: "Every force evolves a form." From this perspective, form doesn't simply, dutifully follow a set of functional requirements. Instead, dynamic forces gradually forge resultant forms. These forces aren't simply functional; they can also be communal or spiritual, as was the case with the Shakers.

• For working designers, "every force evolves a form" is a more useful rule. The design process actually begins with something that doesn't yet exist but needs to exist, and it moves forward toward a formal result. Function alone doesn't drive the resultant form. The form evolves from the holistic forces of the project—audience needs, client desires, ethical obligations, aesthetic inclinations, material properties, cultural presuppositions, and yes, functional requirements. "Function" is rightly seen as a single, isolated, quantifiable aspect of the overall "force" driving the form.

• http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1353612
  
  For starters, aesthetics is concerned with anything that appeals to the senses—not just what we see, but what we hear, smell, taste, and feel. In short, how we perceive and interpret the world.

• http://alistapart.com/article/indefenseofeyecandy
  
  In other words, aesthetics is not just about the artistic merit of web buttons or other visual effects, but about how people respond to these elements. Our question becomes: how do aesthetic design choices influence understanding and emotions, and how do understanding and emotions influence behavior? Research into attention, persuasion, choice, happiness, learning, and other similar topics suggests that the more attractive button is likely to be more usable by most people. To get an idea of where this perspective might come from, consider this comment on emotions from neurobiologist Antonio Damasio: “...emotion is not a luxury: it is an expression of basic mechanisms of life regulation developed in evolution, and is indispensable for survival. It plays a critical role in virtually all aspects of learning, reasoning, and creativity. Somewhat surprisingly, it may play a role in the construction of consciousness.” [1]
  
  In many design conversations, there is a belief that applications are made enjoyable because we make them easy to use and efficient (interestingly, whether it’s stated or not, these conversations value the role that aesthetics plays in cognition). However, when we talk about how emotions influence interactions, it’s closer to the truth to say things that are enjoyable will be easy to use and efficient. Allow me to explain. Product packaging infi‚uences our perception of the product inside. Attention to design details implies that the same care and attention has been spent on the other (less visible) parts of the product—which implies that this is a trustworthy product.
  
  We want those things we find pleasing to succeed. We’re more tolerant of problems with things that we find attractive.\We want those things we find pleasing to succeed. We’re more tolerant of problems with things that we find attractive. In other words, how we “think” cannot be separated from how we “feel.”
• In the early 1900s, “form follows function” became the mantra of modern architecture. Frank Lloyd Wrightchanged this phrase to “form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union,” using nature as the best example of this integration.
• The more we learn about people, and how our brains process information, the more we learn the truth of that phrase: form and function aren’t separate items. If we believe that style somehow exists independent of functionality, that we can treat aesthetics and function as two separate pieces, then we ignore the evidence that beauty is much more than decoration. Our brains can’t help but agree.
• Reference[1] Emotion and Feelings: A Neurobiological Perspective by Ant³nio Dam¡sio[2] “Emotion as a Cognitive Artifact and the Design Implications for Products That are Perceived As Pleasurable” by Frank Spillers

• Stephen P. Anderson

• Stephen P. Anderson is an independent consultant based out of Dallas, Texas. He spends an unhealthy amount of time thinking about user experience design and intrapreneurial teams—topics he loves to speak about. Stephen is also the twisted mind behindUX Roast.
• Function is Dead – Long Live Function By Gary Dickson
  
  http://www.graphic-design.com/DTG/dickson/form_follows_function.html
• "Form Follows Function" was first penned countless eons ago by American architect Louis Sullivan in his article "the Tall Office Building Artistically Considered". It has grown, mutated and evolved over the last century or so and is now widely referenced as a guiding principle in nearly all types of design . There are reasons for the steps that we take as designers and those reasons or motivating factors rest firmly on a foundation that some call "function". What we face in the consumer age is not the destruction of "function" as the foundation for good design but rather a re-definition of what function is or can be. If the function of a design is solely that it needs to appeal to a specific group of people, then as the designer you had better do your research and keep that function in mind throughout the design process. This is not always an easy task in the design-what-you-like world that we live in. I won't kid you -- most designers do have a style. But, a good designer should know how to adapt that style to fit the needs of the client. In extremely rare instances the gap between the designers style and the clients need may be completely irreconcilable. It is then the designers job to say so.
  
  http://academics.triton.edu/faculty/fheitzman/tallofficebuilding.html
• The tall office building artistically considered by Louis H. Sullivan, March, 1896
• While "form" and "function" may be more or less explicit and invariant concepts to the many engineering doctrines, Metaprogramming and the Functional programming paradigm lend themselves very well to explore, blur and invert the essence of those two concepts.According to Lamarck's long-discredited theory of evolution, anatomy will be structured according to functions associated with use; for instance, giraffes are taller to reach the leaves of trees. By contrast, in Darwinian evolution, form (variation) precedes function (as determined by selection). That is to say in Lamarckian evolution the form is altered by the required function, whereas in Darwinian evolution small variations in form allow some parts of the population to function "better", and are therefore more successful reproductively.
  
  The Bauhaus style later became one of the most influential currents in modern design,Modernist architecture and art, design and architectural education.[1] The Bauhaus had a profound influence upon subsequent developments in art, architecture, graphic design, interior design, industrial design, andtypography.[2]
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauhaus
• Norman, D. A. (2002). Emotion and design: Attractive things work better. Interactions Magazine, ix (4), 36-42.
  
  ABSTRACT
  
  Advances in our understanding of emotion and affect have implications for the science of design. Affect changes the operating parameters of cognition: positive affect enhances creative, breadth-first thinking whereas negative affect focuses cognition, enhancing depth-first processing and minimizing distractions. Therefore, it is essential that products designed for use under stress follow good human-centered design, for stress makes people less able to cope with difficulties and less flexible in their approach to problem solving. Positive affect makes people more tolerant of minor difficulties and more flexible and creative in finding solutions. Products designed for more relaxed, pleasant occasions can enhance their usability through pleasant, aesthetic design. Aesthetics matter: attractive things work better.
  
  http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/emotion_design_at.html
• Scientists and emotions stuff > http://www.jnd.org/ED_Draft/CH01.pdf
• http://www.ucpress.edu/op.php?isbn=9780520005143 < form follows function book