A vacuum cleaner would be a good example for our last CGT512 class, where we talked about the implemented (system) model, represented model, and the users’ mental model.
This time, I’m thinking about the name, not the interface. Here is what Wikipedia says, “A vacuum cleaner is a device that uses an air pump to create a partial vacuum to suck up dust and dirt.” The interesting thing about the name “vacuum cleaner” is that it is actually reflecting the implemented model of the machine, though it is not reflecting the implemented model accurately–it is “partial vacuum” that immediately get refilled with new air together with dust not absolute real “vacuum”. However, users would associate the meaning of the word “vacuum” with their mental model and the represented model about the machine, that is, absorbing dust.
From an educational perspective, I’ve read that in psychics education, it is difficult to teach students the concept of a real vacuum with no air which has nothing to do with absorbing dust and dirt, because they’ve previously associated the meaning of “vacuum” with absorbing dust. In Chinese, we do not call a vacuum cleaner a “vacuum cleaner”, we just call it a dust absorbing machine. Also, we do not call vacuum “vacuum”, we just call “real empty”.
Wondering what are the rules for naming product, it seems to involve branding and making it sounds cool, rather than easier to understand?
I’m attending the salsa dance club this semester! I just really like the design of the logo of this club. It is a nice demonstration of Gestalt Law of continuity (the girl’s hair), contrast, and closure. The flow of the hair reminds the audience the rythme of the dance.
Although not related to “visual” perception, the slogan uses a pun of the meaning of “salsa”. This connects the dance with the audience’s previous knowledge about “salsa” as a dip for tortilla chips with a sense of humor. In my opinion, this catches the users’ attention and also help construct the path from working memory to long time memory by utilizing the users’ previous knowledge.
In the last class of CGT512 (a HCI and UX class I’m taking this semester), when we discuss about the history of GUI, we briefly mentioned the Memex microfilm viewer described by Vannevar Bush in 1945. Memex reminds us that human brain works with associations and links rather than alphabetical orders or clearly defined categories. I’ve been having some interests in tagging, categorization, and information retrieval. I’ve also encountered some categorization problems in my life and research recently:
1. I moved to a new place recently–an exciting house! Okay, during the process of packing stuff, I tried to be very very organized. I put summer clothes, winter clothes, spring/fall clothes, shoes, kitchen stuffs, bath stuffs, etc. separately in different boxes, and marked them. But in the end, I lost my patience to categorize every tiny bit of things into the exact categories. I just couldn’t find a proper category for them or they belong to several different categories. Or I found something belong to a certain category but that box was already sealed. I also need to consider whether they belong to things that I will use quite often recently or can leave in the basement for long, but this sometimes conflicts with the previous categories I have set. I had such a headache trying to be organized and make my life easier looking for things when settle down at the new place, but there are still things I cannot remember where exactly I packed until now that I’ve been in the new house for almost three weeks. What I kept thinking during the process was that there gonna be a better way to organize stuff! According to the Memex philosophy, maybe I shouldn’t categorize the stuffs based on their same properties, I should organize them based on associations, but how? It seems the modern grocery stores are also thinking about this problem of how to organize their shelves to increase profit, such as the famous example of putting pampers and beer together.
2. I’ve been working on a project analyzing some Twitter posts by engineering students. I retrieved all the tweets under a Twitter hashtag #engineeringProblems. I want to find some common rules in these students’ vocabulary so I can retrieve more relevant tweets in the future, but I couldn’t put these vocabulary under clearly separated categories using the topic modeling algorithms. The same words or phrases jump around several different categories. Should I manually force them into clearly separate categories? Or should I just study keywords co-occurrence (association)? Or should I do both? How language is developed and organized?
I went back to re-read one of Dr.V’s blog posts written almost a year ago on tagging and information categorization. My understanding is that human brain works based on associations, and human brain also desires for control and clear overall pictures. I become very much intrigued about what a superb task management and information retrieval system interface will look like enabling both associations in human brain and also give the sense of control and clear categorization ?