Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter five of "Why We Make Mistakes" investigates the concept of multitasking and the effects of multitasking on the human brain. Joseph Hallinan does a great job driving the importance of this idea home early in the chapter by telling a story about a commercial airplane that crashes because its pilot was distracted. Upon descent, the pilot noticed that the landing gear light was not lit even though he lowered the landing gear. The pilot asked for the copilot's help and even contacted a passenger that was a Boeing aircraft mechanic. While the pilot and company were investigating this strange occurrence, the plane had continued its descent and had crashed into the Florida Everglades killing everyone on board, nearly 100 poor souls. The point is that while distraction seems like a minor inconvenience and a nuisance at most, it actually can lead to a major accident.
Hallinan wastes no time relating this event to countless other similar occurrences, establishing that this was not an isolated incident. His explanation for this behavior is that while multitasking seems like a benefit, it can really be a curse, causing overwhelming amounts of distraction. Most people imagine that our brains multitasking is similar to a computer downloading a file while simultaneously playing music. However, computers actually switch back and forth between processes at a super fast rate. So fast in fact, that the users perceive no noticeable gaps in performance. The human brain does not work this same way. Every time that we focus on a new task, we lose the short term memory associated with the previous task.
This idea is evident in the example of the bus driver that took the roof off of his coach bus with a group of students on board. He was supposed to follow the lead bus, but its driver did not include him in the trip planning process and was not answering his phone. As he was driving, he called his sister to vent and while he was ranting his bus approached an arched bridge with severe height restriction in the right-hand lane. The lead bus changed lanes into the center lane to avoid an overhead collision, but he did not. The top two feet of the bus was sheered off and a passenger was severely injured. Luckily no one was killed. When interviewed, the bus driver told officials that not only did he not see the warning sign, he did not even see the bridge at all.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Book Reading: Opening Skinner's Box (Chapters 9 & 10)
Chapter 9:
In chapter nine, Slater investigates some hard, biological proof that memory has cellular mechanisms that can be measured and monitored. Slater recalls a story of a man called Henry, who was having severe, lifestyle-limiting seizures. Henry has a procedure done by Dr. Scoville, in which his entire hippocampus was excised. As a result of the procedure, Henry lost all capabilities of forming new memories, suggesting that the Hippocampus is at a minimum a part of the path to creating new memories. Eric Kandel, an Austrian survivor of Kristallnacht, is a psychoanalyst and neurological scientist that graduated from Harvard. Kendal performed some seriously cool experiments on sea slugs that physically proved that there are biological memory mechanisms.
Kandel removed aplysia neurons and preserved them in a broth, allowing him to manipulate them into communicating with each other. As Kandel observed the neurons communicating, he witnessed the two neurons physically growing synaptic connections, creating a pathway for communication and establishing the most primitive proof of memory mechanisms. What is even more interesting, is that the more that Kandel made these neurons communicate with each other, the larger and stronger the synaptic connection became. This allowed Kandel to move beyond simple, short-term memory to long-term memory. This also helped enforce the old adage: “use it or lose it.”
Chapter 10:
Chapter ten is devoted to Lobotomies, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Antonio Moniz is a Portuguese doctor that won the Nobel Prize in 1949 for his role in psychosurgery, specifically the Lobotomy. One interesting fact about Moniz, is that he suffers from a severe case of gout and therefore is highly dependent upon helpers during surgery, where he normally advises from a managerial role. Before Moniz actually performed a psychosurgical procedure, he first had to find a way to visualize the brain in its entirety, which is something that was not previously possible. He was able to do this by injecting a dye into the patients neck and then perform X-rays on the head of the patient. Through this technique, Moniz was able to more accurately visualize the inner workings of the brain.
The first patient that Moniz performed a lobotomy on was Mrs. M., who was severely depressed and suffered from acute anxiety attacks. Instead of using a blade to cut away the brain synapses, Moniz injected small amounts of alcohol, which killed the surrounding tissue, including the synapses. Post-procedure interviews with Mrs. M. showed that the procedure was successful in suppressing her depression and anxiety attacks. However, due to lack of future follow up and recording, little is known of how the patient reacted to the lobotomy long term.Another scientist, Dr. Freeman from the United States, created a different form of lobotomy in which a sharp punch-like tool was forced through the soft spots of the skull located in the ocular cavity. This is the form of the lobotomy that I have heard the most about and envision when someone mentions a lobotomy.
In chapter nine, Slater investigates some hard, biological proof that memory has cellular mechanisms that can be measured and monitored. Slater recalls a story of a man called Henry, who was having severe, lifestyle-limiting seizures. Henry has a procedure done by Dr. Scoville, in which his entire hippocampus was excised. As a result of the procedure, Henry lost all capabilities of forming new memories, suggesting that the Hippocampus is at a minimum a part of the path to creating new memories. Eric Kandel, an Austrian survivor of Kristallnacht, is a psychoanalyst and neurological scientist that graduated from Harvard. Kendal performed some seriously cool experiments on sea slugs that physically proved that there are biological memory mechanisms.
Kandel removed aplysia neurons and preserved them in a broth, allowing him to manipulate them into communicating with each other. As Kandel observed the neurons communicating, he witnessed the two neurons physically growing synaptic connections, creating a pathway for communication and establishing the most primitive proof of memory mechanisms. What is even more interesting, is that the more that Kandel made these neurons communicate with each other, the larger and stronger the synaptic connection became. This allowed Kandel to move beyond simple, short-term memory to long-term memory. This also helped enforce the old adage: “use it or lose it.”
Chapter 10:
Chapter ten is devoted to Lobotomies, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Antonio Moniz is a Portuguese doctor that won the Nobel Prize in 1949 for his role in psychosurgery, specifically the Lobotomy. One interesting fact about Moniz, is that he suffers from a severe case of gout and therefore is highly dependent upon helpers during surgery, where he normally advises from a managerial role. Before Moniz actually performed a psychosurgical procedure, he first had to find a way to visualize the brain in its entirety, which is something that was not previously possible. He was able to do this by injecting a dye into the patients neck and then perform X-rays on the head of the patient. Through this technique, Moniz was able to more accurately visualize the inner workings of the brain.
The first patient that Moniz performed a lobotomy on was Mrs. M., who was severely depressed and suffered from acute anxiety attacks. Instead of using a blade to cut away the brain synapses, Moniz injected small amounts of alcohol, which killed the surrounding tissue, including the synapses. Post-procedure interviews with Mrs. M. showed that the procedure was successful in suppressing her depression and anxiety attacks. However, due to lack of future follow up and recording, little is known of how the patient reacted to the lobotomy long term.Another scientist, Dr. Freeman from the United States, created a different form of lobotomy in which a sharp punch-like tool was forced through the soft spots of the skull located in the ocular cavity. This is the form of the lobotomy that I have heard the most about and envision when someone mentions a lobotomy.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Book Reading: Opening Skinner's Box (Chapters 7 & 8)
Chapter 7:
Chapter 7, which seems to be one of my favorite chapters so far, focuses on addiction and substance abuse. During the 1960’s and 1970’s there were a lot of studies conducted in the area of substance abuse and addiction. Most of the popular theories at the time stressed a physical dependency as the main source and contributing factor to extreme addiction. These theories also stress that the brain is capable of producing most of the chemicals found in drugs such as cocaine and opiates. When these substances are abused, the brain takes a break from producing these chemicals, so that when the person stops using the substances, the body lacks these chemicals because the brain is on break.
Bruce Alexander and his research partners challenged the very basis of these theories in their Rat Park experiments. Bruce Alexander earned his undergraduate degree at Miami (Ohio) University and, intrigued by Harry Harlow’s studies of love, decided to earn a mentorship under Harlow. When the Vietnam war broke out, Alexander moved to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and after teaching a course on heroin addiction, decided to devise his own study to test substance abuse. His study, known as Rat Park, seeked to challenge conventional wisdom regarding substance addiction. Alexander studied rats and morphine, but focused his studies on the situation and the environment that the rats are subject to. Some of Alexander’s rats were kept in cramped, cold, and small cages similar to traditional studies, while others were kept in a wide-open cage, complete with ample food, friendship, mating opportunities, and safety. The remarkable difference is that the Rat Park rats would actively reject any drugs introduced, while the caged, depressed rats would toke up like crazy. While this study did not get much national scientific attention, I believe that these results better explain substance abuse. Although, I can also see that critics have ample footholds from which to launch an attack on Alexander’s theory.
Chapter 8:
Chapter 8 is a very interesting, but very frustrating chapter. In chapter 8, Slater spends time investigating memory and an experiment that challenges the basis of our understanding of memory. Elizabeth Loftus is a psychologist that focuses on false memories. Loftus believes that the human mind hates holes in memories and seeks to fill those holes by either accepting false information provided by an external resource or fabricating its own details to fill the gaps. She studies this by having her students conduct experiments on their siblings over a Thanksgiving break. Each student went home and casually brought up a fake story about their sibling getting lost at a mall, but providing only the slightest and vague details surrounding the event. Over the next few days the students observed their siblings filling in the gaps with the most interesting and small details. For example, some of the subjects remembered large amounts of fear and conversations with their mother after being found. Other subjects remembered strangers interacting with them during the time that they were lost.
I find this chapter quite difficult to read, because I do not want to stomach the idea of false memories. One of the most cherished things in my life is my memories and one of my biggest fears is not being able to trust my memories. I like to think of memories as concrete items, that are perhaps stored in a tricky filing system, that cannot always be retrieved easily, but that are there in their entirety. I do not like the idea that some of my memories could be fabrications of my imagination, in an attempt to fill voids. This does sound like a real possibility, but it is one that I would rather be blissfully ignorant about.
Chapter 7, which seems to be one of my favorite chapters so far, focuses on addiction and substance abuse. During the 1960’s and 1970’s there were a lot of studies conducted in the area of substance abuse and addiction. Most of the popular theories at the time stressed a physical dependency as the main source and contributing factor to extreme addiction. These theories also stress that the brain is capable of producing most of the chemicals found in drugs such as cocaine and opiates. When these substances are abused, the brain takes a break from producing these chemicals, so that when the person stops using the substances, the body lacks these chemicals because the brain is on break.
Bruce Alexander and his research partners challenged the very basis of these theories in their Rat Park experiments. Bruce Alexander earned his undergraduate degree at Miami (Ohio) University and, intrigued by Harry Harlow’s studies of love, decided to earn a mentorship under Harlow. When the Vietnam war broke out, Alexander moved to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and after teaching a course on heroin addiction, decided to devise his own study to test substance abuse. His study, known as Rat Park, seeked to challenge conventional wisdom regarding substance addiction. Alexander studied rats and morphine, but focused his studies on the situation and the environment that the rats are subject to. Some of Alexander’s rats were kept in cramped, cold, and small cages similar to traditional studies, while others were kept in a wide-open cage, complete with ample food, friendship, mating opportunities, and safety. The remarkable difference is that the Rat Park rats would actively reject any drugs introduced, while the caged, depressed rats would toke up like crazy. While this study did not get much national scientific attention, I believe that these results better explain substance abuse. Although, I can also see that critics have ample footholds from which to launch an attack on Alexander’s theory.
Chapter 8:
Chapter 8 is a very interesting, but very frustrating chapter. In chapter 8, Slater spends time investigating memory and an experiment that challenges the basis of our understanding of memory. Elizabeth Loftus is a psychologist that focuses on false memories. Loftus believes that the human mind hates holes in memories and seeks to fill those holes by either accepting false information provided by an external resource or fabricating its own details to fill the gaps. She studies this by having her students conduct experiments on their siblings over a Thanksgiving break. Each student went home and casually brought up a fake story about their sibling getting lost at a mall, but providing only the slightest and vague details surrounding the event. Over the next few days the students observed their siblings filling in the gaps with the most interesting and small details. For example, some of the subjects remembered large amounts of fear and conversations with their mother after being found. Other subjects remembered strangers interacting with them during the time that they were lost.
I find this chapter quite difficult to read, because I do not want to stomach the idea of false memories. One of the most cherished things in my life is my memories and one of my biggest fears is not being able to trust my memories. I like to think of memories as concrete items, that are perhaps stored in a tricky filing system, that cannot always be retrieved easily, but that are there in their entirety. I do not like the idea that some of my memories could be fabrications of my imagination, in an attempt to fill voids. This does sound like a real possibility, but it is one that I would rather be blissfully ignorant about.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Book Reading: Opening Skinner's Box (Chapters 5 & 6)
Chapter 5:
In chapter 5 we we hear about an interesting study and a very interesting woman. Leon Festinger is a psychologist from City College of New York and the University of Iowa, but whose primary contributions to the field of psychology were research studies done at MIT. Festinger infiltrated a cult that believed that the world was going to end on December 21 (sounds vaguely familiar), 1954, in a massive flood meant to cleanse the world and start anew. The cult leader, Marion Keech, had supposedly received messages from a god named Sananda, who would save anyone who believed in him and transport them to a planet far off to live after the cleansing of the earth. Marion was so convincing that she had followers selling their homes, leaving their jobs, and even abandoning loved ones. Festinger acted like a believer and infiltrated the group to see how they would react when the world indeed did not end. Festinger was surprised to find that the group would shape their beliefs around the events, instead of admitted they were wrong and questioning their beliefs.
The second half of chapter 5 is spent discussing this woman, Linda Santo, who believes that her brain-dead child is a saint with a direct line of communication to God. Her child, Audrey, was found floating in a pool when she was three years old, and while they were able to revive her, she was brain dead. Linda kept her daughter alive through the use of machines in order to take pain away from others who are suffering. People flock from all around the world to have Audrey heal them. Personally, based off of very limited information, I believe that Audrey was merely a placebo for all of the people who experienced medical recoveries. That is not to say that it was a bad thing. I have all different types of rituals that I partake in when it comes to competing in sporting events and training. I do not necessarily believe that I am 100% right about these things, but they give me a mental edge, which helps me perform better. I believe that a similar situation occurs with placebo effects, but that does not take away from the results. In my opinion, it is really all about what works for someone in their situation. If it works for you, so be it.
Chapter 6:
In chapter 6, Lauren spends time investigating Harry Harlow's experiments with primates. Harlow investigated the idea of love in primates. His experiment involved taking baby monkeys away from their parents in order to examine how they react to an artificial mother. Two artificial mothers are introduced to the monkey's cage, and the monkeys are observed and their behaviors are recorded. The first artificial monkey is a cold, hard metal monkey that has one breast capable of delivering milk to the baby. The second artificial monkey is a soft, terry-cloth covered monkey, that has no milk delivering capabilities. The monkey babies were expected to be more drawn towards the cold metal, but life-supplying artificial monkey. This would have supported the fact that babies are attached to supporting life. However, the monkeys all grew attached to the terry-cloth artificial monkeys. They would separate long enough to get milk from the metal one, but only to return to the soft artificial monkeys.
Overall, I believe that this guy may have hid behind a virtuous goal, but he did some sick stuff. The Iron Maiden experiments were repulsive. I feel like a lot of of the experiments were viable and helpful, but some of the experiments were off the deep end and excessive.
In chapter 5 we we hear about an interesting study and a very interesting woman. Leon Festinger is a psychologist from City College of New York and the University of Iowa, but whose primary contributions to the field of psychology were research studies done at MIT. Festinger infiltrated a cult that believed that the world was going to end on December 21 (sounds vaguely familiar), 1954, in a massive flood meant to cleanse the world and start anew. The cult leader, Marion Keech, had supposedly received messages from a god named Sananda, who would save anyone who believed in him and transport them to a planet far off to live after the cleansing of the earth. Marion was so convincing that she had followers selling their homes, leaving their jobs, and even abandoning loved ones. Festinger acted like a believer and infiltrated the group to see how they would react when the world indeed did not end. Festinger was surprised to find that the group would shape their beliefs around the events, instead of admitted they were wrong and questioning their beliefs.
The second half of chapter 5 is spent discussing this woman, Linda Santo, who believes that her brain-dead child is a saint with a direct line of communication to God. Her child, Audrey, was found floating in a pool when she was three years old, and while they were able to revive her, she was brain dead. Linda kept her daughter alive through the use of machines in order to take pain away from others who are suffering. People flock from all around the world to have Audrey heal them. Personally, based off of very limited information, I believe that Audrey was merely a placebo for all of the people who experienced medical recoveries. That is not to say that it was a bad thing. I have all different types of rituals that I partake in when it comes to competing in sporting events and training. I do not necessarily believe that I am 100% right about these things, but they give me a mental edge, which helps me perform better. I believe that a similar situation occurs with placebo effects, but that does not take away from the results. In my opinion, it is really all about what works for someone in their situation. If it works for you, so be it.
Chapter 6:
In chapter 6, Lauren spends time investigating Harry Harlow's experiments with primates. Harlow investigated the idea of love in primates. His experiment involved taking baby monkeys away from their parents in order to examine how they react to an artificial mother. Two artificial mothers are introduced to the monkey's cage, and the monkeys are observed and their behaviors are recorded. The first artificial monkey is a cold, hard metal monkey that has one breast capable of delivering milk to the baby. The second artificial monkey is a soft, terry-cloth covered monkey, that has no milk delivering capabilities. The monkey babies were expected to be more drawn towards the cold metal, but life-supplying artificial monkey. This would have supported the fact that babies are attached to supporting life. However, the monkeys all grew attached to the terry-cloth artificial monkeys. They would separate long enough to get milk from the metal one, but only to return to the soft artificial monkeys.
Overall, I believe that this guy may have hid behind a virtuous goal, but he did some sick stuff. The Iron Maiden experiments were repulsive. I feel like a lot of of the experiments were viable and helpful, but some of the experiments were off the deep end and excessive.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Book Reading: Opening Skinner's Box (Chapters 3 & 4)
Chapter 3:
Chapter 3 presents evidence proving that Lauren Slater really is a little bit crazy. Slater presents a study, performed by David Rosenhan in the early 1970s, in which sane people infiltrated insane asylums by feigning insanity and then test how long until the doctors realized that they were actually sane. Rosenhan recruits eight buddies and has each of them fake the same symptoms, which are hearing a voice say “thud,” hopefully leading to being admitted as a psych patient. The pseudopatients are instructed to be truthful about every other aspect of their life and once they are admitted, they are supposed to act as if they are completely fine. Rosenhan and the other participants reported back that they were treated with disdain and witnessed verbal and physical abuse of other patients. One of the most interesting things that the pseudopatients said was that the other patients seemed to always know that the pseudopatients were not really insane.
Before Rosenhan conducted his research experiment, two scientists had conducted a related experiment. R. Rosenthal and L. Jacobson did an experiment where a fake IQ and aptitude test was administered to students. Some students were labeled as students that were on the verge of a large increase in intelligence, while other students were labeled as normal students. After one year, the students who were labeled as growth students had indeed significantly improved. This result could be attributed to having extra attention and situational context from the teacher who expected them to do well. This result could also be attributed to the students thinking that they were smarter than they are so they might have tried significantly harder.
We also hear tales of how Lauren Slater was herself a depressed psychiatric patient when she was younger. This information explains some things about her odd writing style. Slater attempts to reproduce Rosenhan’s experiment in the present day which yielded interesting results. Slater visited eight different psychiatric emergency rooms over an eight day period explaining the exact same symptoms as the pseudopatients in Rosenhan’s experiment. While she was diagnosed as depressed, she was not admitted and was not treated poorly. In fact, she seems to have felt extremely guilty because of how well she was treated and how genuinely concerned the doctors appeared to be.
Chapter 4:
Chapter 4 is dedicated to telling the story of a strange New York City crime, where a woman is savagely raped and murdered over a 35 minute period. The strangest part of the event is that thirty-eight witnesses heard or saw the assault taking place and none of them helped in any way. John Darley and Bibb Latane are two psychologists who study people in emergencies and the reasons why they might deny the existence of the emergencies. John Darley is from New York University and Bibb Latane is from Columbia University. They devise an experiment where an innocent subject participates in a group therapy session where two to six people are in separate rooms and are given turns to talk to the group through a microphone. The other participants are actually recordings and one has a severe form of epilepsy, which they casually and nonchalantly announced to the group during an earlier rotation. Eventually, the epileptic subject announces that they are having a seizure and then repeatedly ask for help over a six minute period. Less than thirty-five percent of the subjects seeked help when they believed that there were four or more participants in the group. If the subjects believe that they are the only ones in the group with the epileptic subject, then eighty-five percent of the subjects seek help immediately.
This result is very interesting, because it suggests that the same amount of responsibility can be shared across a group, instead of being amplified as some people might think it would be. Personally, I would think that people would be more likely to help if they were in a larger group, but these reports and studies prove that it is exactly the opposite. Now that I have read about these situations, I can think of times when I have been faced with a situation where I have been shamed into inactivity by the social cues of a crowd. The main example that comes to mind is last week when an armed suspect was seen on campus with a gun in his waistband. The Code Maroon alert said that the suspect was near the University Central Garage (UCG), which is right by Kyle Field, the MSC, Rudder Tower, and Koldus. I was in the MSC, among hundreds of other students, and I noticed that other people were getting the same Code Maroon notifications that I was. However, people kept on going on like normal. Sometimes you would notice people looking around and observing what other people were doing. In this situation, I think that the primary factor influencing our lack of activity was the idea of not knowing what to do. Do you leave and potentially run into the armed suspect? Or do you stay put, in a large group, where you think you will be safe? Do you hide? Well, all of us were stuck in a state of inactivity and did absolutely nothing. How peculiar.
Chapter 3 presents evidence proving that Lauren Slater really is a little bit crazy. Slater presents a study, performed by David Rosenhan in the early 1970s, in which sane people infiltrated insane asylums by feigning insanity and then test how long until the doctors realized that they were actually sane. Rosenhan recruits eight buddies and has each of them fake the same symptoms, which are hearing a voice say “thud,” hopefully leading to being admitted as a psych patient. The pseudopatients are instructed to be truthful about every other aspect of their life and once they are admitted, they are supposed to act as if they are completely fine. Rosenhan and the other participants reported back that they were treated with disdain and witnessed verbal and physical abuse of other patients. One of the most interesting things that the pseudopatients said was that the other patients seemed to always know that the pseudopatients were not really insane.
Before Rosenhan conducted his research experiment, two scientists had conducted a related experiment. R. Rosenthal and L. Jacobson did an experiment where a fake IQ and aptitude test was administered to students. Some students were labeled as students that were on the verge of a large increase in intelligence, while other students were labeled as normal students. After one year, the students who were labeled as growth students had indeed significantly improved. This result could be attributed to having extra attention and situational context from the teacher who expected them to do well. This result could also be attributed to the students thinking that they were smarter than they are so they might have tried significantly harder.
We also hear tales of how Lauren Slater was herself a depressed psychiatric patient when she was younger. This information explains some things about her odd writing style. Slater attempts to reproduce Rosenhan’s experiment in the present day which yielded interesting results. Slater visited eight different psychiatric emergency rooms over an eight day period explaining the exact same symptoms as the pseudopatients in Rosenhan’s experiment. While she was diagnosed as depressed, she was not admitted and was not treated poorly. In fact, she seems to have felt extremely guilty because of how well she was treated and how genuinely concerned the doctors appeared to be.
Chapter 4:
Chapter 4 is dedicated to telling the story of a strange New York City crime, where a woman is savagely raped and murdered over a 35 minute period. The strangest part of the event is that thirty-eight witnesses heard or saw the assault taking place and none of them helped in any way. John Darley and Bibb Latane are two psychologists who study people in emergencies and the reasons why they might deny the existence of the emergencies. John Darley is from New York University and Bibb Latane is from Columbia University. They devise an experiment where an innocent subject participates in a group therapy session where two to six people are in separate rooms and are given turns to talk to the group through a microphone. The other participants are actually recordings and one has a severe form of epilepsy, which they casually and nonchalantly announced to the group during an earlier rotation. Eventually, the epileptic subject announces that they are having a seizure and then repeatedly ask for help over a six minute period. Less than thirty-five percent of the subjects seeked help when they believed that there were four or more participants in the group. If the subjects believe that they are the only ones in the group with the epileptic subject, then eighty-five percent of the subjects seek help immediately.
This result is very interesting, because it suggests that the same amount of responsibility can be shared across a group, instead of being amplified as some people might think it would be. Personally, I would think that people would be more likely to help if they were in a larger group, but these reports and studies prove that it is exactly the opposite. Now that I have read about these situations, I can think of times when I have been faced with a situation where I have been shamed into inactivity by the social cues of a crowd. The main example that comes to mind is last week when an armed suspect was seen on campus with a gun in his waistband. The Code Maroon alert said that the suspect was near the University Central Garage (UCG), which is right by Kyle Field, the MSC, Rudder Tower, and Koldus. I was in the MSC, among hundreds of other students, and I noticed that other people were getting the same Code Maroon notifications that I was. However, people kept on going on like normal. Sometimes you would notice people looking around and observing what other people were doing. In this situation, I think that the primary factor influencing our lack of activity was the idea of not knowing what to do. Do you leave and potentially run into the armed suspect? Or do you stay put, in a large group, where you think you will be safe? Do you hide? Well, all of us were stuck in a state of inactivity and did absolutely nothing. How peculiar.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Book Reading: Opening Skinner's Box (Chapters 1 & 2)
Chapter 1:
“Opening Skinner’s Box” is a brief look into the studies done by B. F. Skinner, arguably the most influential American psychologist. The book is written by Lauren Slater, who is a psychologist and a writer. Chapter one introduces the relevant background studies that paved the way for Skinner. This mainly includes a glimpse into the works of Ivan Pavlov, a Russian Physiologist who was able to train a dog to drool as a response to the ringing of a bell. Chapter one also includes a short introduction to Skinner’s studies, which included training a dog to play hide and seek and raising his daughter Deborah in a sealed box (which isn’t as bad as it sounds) for the first two years of her life.
Also, Lauren visits Julie, B. F. Skinner’s other daughter, and learns more about Skinner’s goals and ideals. This trip culminates in a visit to Skinner’s study room, which has been preserved in the exact state that he left it in before he was rushed to the hospital and passed away in 1990. One of the most interesting parts of the trip is the perspective that is gained by talking with one of Skinner's daughter; someone who can truly debunk most of the myths surrounding the life and studies of B. F. Skinner.
Chapter 2:
In chapter 2, Lauren Slater summarizes Milgram’s obedience experiments. This part of the book is a bit boring because we have read Milgram’s book, but noting Slater’s opinions of the obedience experiments is interesting. Most of this part of the chapter is devoted to summarizing the obedience experiments, including the multiple variations, but it is interesting to hear it from a different perspective. Slater does not seem to be completely sold on the point that Milgram is trying to make about obedience, but does not discount the enormity of the results of Milgram's obedience experiments.
In the second part of chapter 2, Slater interviews two of the participants of the obedience experiment. First, Joshua Chaffin tells Slater about how he disobeyed at 150 volts and that he would need a psychiatrists if he had gone any further. What is interesting is that upon further inspection, he seems to have lived the life of a person that would have been associated with the obedient subjects. Joshua also divulges that the main reason that he disobeyed was out of self interest, because he felt that he was going to have a heart attack. Another subject participant, code named Jacob Plumfield in order to protect his identity, explained that he obeyed completely, but learned a lot from the experiment. Jacob changed his whole life based on the things that he learned from the obedience experiments. Also of note, one of the main detractors of Milgram was Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, who taught at Harvard and specializes in World War II war crimes.
“Opening Skinner’s Box” is a brief look into the studies done by B. F. Skinner, arguably the most influential American psychologist. The book is written by Lauren Slater, who is a psychologist and a writer. Chapter one introduces the relevant background studies that paved the way for Skinner. This mainly includes a glimpse into the works of Ivan Pavlov, a Russian Physiologist who was able to train a dog to drool as a response to the ringing of a bell. Chapter one also includes a short introduction to Skinner’s studies, which included training a dog to play hide and seek and raising his daughter Deborah in a sealed box (which isn’t as bad as it sounds) for the first two years of her life.
Also, Lauren visits Julie, B. F. Skinner’s other daughter, and learns more about Skinner’s goals and ideals. This trip culminates in a visit to Skinner’s study room, which has been preserved in the exact state that he left it in before he was rushed to the hospital and passed away in 1990. One of the most interesting parts of the trip is the perspective that is gained by talking with one of Skinner's daughter; someone who can truly debunk most of the myths surrounding the life and studies of B. F. Skinner.
Chapter 2:
In chapter 2, Lauren Slater summarizes Milgram’s obedience experiments. This part of the book is a bit boring because we have read Milgram’s book, but noting Slater’s opinions of the obedience experiments is interesting. Most of this part of the chapter is devoted to summarizing the obedience experiments, including the multiple variations, but it is interesting to hear it from a different perspective. Slater does not seem to be completely sold on the point that Milgram is trying to make about obedience, but does not discount the enormity of the results of Milgram's obedience experiments.
In the second part of chapter 2, Slater interviews two of the participants of the obedience experiment. First, Joshua Chaffin tells Slater about how he disobeyed at 150 volts and that he would need a psychiatrists if he had gone any further. What is interesting is that upon further inspection, he seems to have lived the life of a person that would have been associated with the obedient subjects. Joshua also divulges that the main reason that he disobeyed was out of self interest, because he felt that he was going to have a heart attack. Another subject participant, code named Jacob Plumfield in order to protect his identity, explained that he obeyed completely, but learned a lot from the experiment. Jacob changed his whole life based on the things that he learned from the obedience experiments. Also of note, one of the main detractors of Milgram was Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, who taught at Harvard and specializes in World War II war crimes.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Book Reading: Obedience to Authority
Obedience to Authority: Stanley Milgram
Chapter 1:
In chapter one, Stanley Milgram introduces the research experiment that this book studies. The research study uses a random participant to ask questions to another participant and shock them when they get answers wrong. For each additional wrong answer, the voltage is increased. The participant getting shocked is actually a paid actor, who is faking the shocking. The purpose of the study is to see how far the random participants will go, if they have an authoritative figure to transfer the moral responsibility to. Also, Milgram elaborates on the differences between a personal act and an act done under the shield of responsibility.
Chapter 2:
The two main conflicting ideas investigated in this research study are “One should not inflict suffering on a helpless person who is neither harmful nor threatening to oneself” vs “Obedience to authority.” All participants in the study were males, between 20 and 50 years old. The first 40% of the participants were workers, skilled and unskilled. The next 40% were white-collar, sales, and business related men. The final 20% of the participants were professionals. The victim, or learner, of the experiment was a 47-year-old accountant and the experimenter, or authority figure, was a 31-year-old teacher. The teacher normally turned to the experimenter for guidance around 300V, the learner stopped responding after 330V+. The study measured the teacher on a scale of 0-30, with 0 being no shocks were administered and 30 being all shock levels were administered.
Chapter 3:
Chapter 3 describes survey results where the study officials survey 110 people, who are all psychiatrists, college students, and mostly middle-class adults of various occupations. Most of them agree that study participants will not proceed shocking the learner past 150V, with only 2-4% expected to reach the end of the board.
Chapter 4:
First variation of experiment involved the teacher shocking the learner from a different room, not being able to see the learner or hear them protest. The second variation provided the teacher with voice feedback from the learner. The third variation had the learner and the teacher located in the same room, mere feet between them. The final variation required the learner to submit to the shock by placing their hand on the shocking plate. After 150V, the learner refused to put his hand on the shocking plate and the teacher/subject was told to physically force the learners hand on to the plate. The results differed extremely fromt the predictions. Nearly half of the participants proceeded all of the way to the end of the switchboard, but still claiming that they were acting against their own morals.
Chapter 5:
Chapter five is devoted to telling stories of subjects and their individual, unique reactions to the experiment. Bruno Betta, a welder, held down learner’s hand and seemed fine with it. He even said to the learner that he “...better answer and get it over with. We can’t stay here all night.” Next, a professor of Old Testament disobeyed and when told that he has “no other choice but to go on,” he responds “If this were Russia maybe, but not in America.” Then, Jan Rensaleer, an Industrial Engineer, blamed himself completely and ended up helping out with the experiment long term. I really liked the Industrial Engineer, because I like to think that I would behave like him if I were a subject in this experiment.
Chapter 6:
Chapter six introduces a new twist to the experiment, by having the learner claim to have a heart condition and bring it up repeatedly when demanding to be released from the experiment. The idea was to give subjects more reason to consider being disobedient, but 26 out of 40 still obeyed through level 30. The next variation included a weaker, less imposing experimenter and more intimidating learner. In this situation, a small drop in obedience was noted, but 50% still obey through level 30. They even introduced women as subjects and saw virtually the same results. The only difference was that during the post-study interviews, the women said that they were much more conflicted. Another interesting variation is removing the Yale influence from the studies credibility by moving the study away from the university. The only variation that produced significant changes in results was when the subjects were allowed to choose the shock level. In this situation all but one of the subjects stopped before 150 volts.
Chapter 7:
Chapter seven discusses individual examples of the variations from chapter six. Fred Prozi, who is unemployed, seemed to feel a ton of conflict, but after transferring all responsibility to the experimenter, was able to push on all of the way to level 30. Karen Dontz, a nurse and housewife, was a basketcase of a subject. She seemed like two different people, one that she really is and one that she wants people to think that she is like. One of the most interesting things about Karen Dontz is that during the interview, she guessed that most men would not comply, even though that is far from the truth. Gretchen Brandt might be my favorite subject so far. Gretchen is a recent German immigrant who works as a medical technician. She stops the experiment early and has no problem disobeying the experimenter. She even says that she was never stressed or conflicted, she just stopped when she felt that the learner was in pain and had no problem telling the experimenter to shove it.
Chapter 8:
Chapter eight investigates the possibilities of changing the authority figure’s role in the experiment. In some of the variations, the learner demands to be shocked and the experimenter says no. In this case, almost all of the subjects stop when the experimenter says to. Another variation is where another “ordinary” man gives the orders to the subject, because the experimenter took a phone call. My favorite variation is where the experimenter comes up with an excuse to be the learner.
Chapter 9:
In chapter 9, Milgram clarifies a very important distinction between conformity and obedience. Conformity describes the action of a subject when he goes along with the actions of his peers. Obedience describes when a subject complies with the orders of authority. These two definitions highlight the idea of a hierarchy, which is a social structure in which there is a clear distinction between levels. People conform to ideals and actions of peers, or people from the same hierarchy level. People obey, or carry out orders from authority figures, or people from higher hierarchical levels. I really like this idea, because it makes a lot of sense in my life. I relate this situation, and the idea of obedience, to working out. When I have an authority figure ordering me to perform a particular exercise, I am able to do it better, faster, and with less regard to my exhaustion level. If I were to try the same exercises on my own, without that authority figure, I would be much more likely to quit. I believe this has to do with not wanting to break the chain of authority and being able to separate my actions (exercising) from the consequences (tired and soreness) because an authority figure is instructing me to continue, regardless of if I want to or not.
Chapter 10:
It was obvious to early humans that obedience and the existence of a hierarchy allows for an increased chance of survival. Milgram illustrates this point by comparing a militia to a mob. The structure of the militia, with a clear hierarchy, will not only provide a higher level of organization, but also allow the militia soldiers a greater level of confidence and lack of fear, because they fear disappointing their own leader more than potentially getting injured by the mob. This provides the militia with an obvious advantage. Milgram also explains this idea in more detail by explaining the Agentic Shift, which describes when a person separates their own feelings, fears, and opinions from the situation and executes commands from an authority figure in a way that is methodical and almost robotic.
Chapter 11:
Chapter 11 investigates obedience from the beginning, looking back all of the way to early childhood. At a very young age, parents teach their kids to obey them and respect elders. This sets the stage for obedience. To further concrete these ideas of obedience, kids are sent to school, where a clear hierarchy exists. First, the students are under the teachers, which are under the principal. Once a person switches into the Agentic State, there occurs a dramatic loss in responsibility. The obedience experiment is very interesting because the subject is caught in this conflicted position where they want to obey and gain accolades from the experimenter, but they also feel conflicted and want to stop. However, if they were to stop they would have to admit that what they had done so far was wrong. Since the tasks are inherently repetitive in nature, while the subject is battling this conflict, until they actually take the leap and disobey, they are left with no choice but to continue.
Chapter 12:
In chapter 12, Milgram explains different coping mechanisms employed by the subjects to reduce stress, strain, and anxiety. Strain is a conflicting feeling experienced by the subjects, where they are battling with internal beliefs. The first, immediate source of strain comes from the physical and psychological response to the learner’s screams. Next, strain occurs as the subject continues to battle with the moral beliefs and social constraints regarding causing pain and harm to the learner. Then, some subjects felt that they were angering the learner to the point that they might physically retaliate after the experiment is over. After that, strain occurs because the subjects are receiving instructions from both the learner and the experimenter. Finally, the subjects have a certain ideal image of themselves, and shocking an innocent victim past their protests usually does not align with this image. The gap between these two ideas causes further strain.
Chapter 13:
In chapter 13, Milgram humors one of the alternative explanations for the behaviors observed, specifically the idea that human beings are inherently sadistic and enjoy causing others pain. The main counter-argument to this idea is that in experiment 11, the subject is given freedom over which level of shock to administer to the learner. The experimenter also pushes for the use of all of the levers, but almost all of the subjects do not exceed the very lower levels of shocks. While there appeared to be one or two outliers who exhibit an eagerness to harm others, Milgram successfully convinces me that a tendency towards obedience is a more likely answer to the question at hand.
Chapter 14:
Milgram devotes chapter 14 to discussing critiques of his obedience experiment. The first major concern he addresses is whether or not the group of people studied were representative of the general population. His main argument in contrast of this claim is that this experiment has been repeated at Princeton, in Munich, in Rome, in South Africa, and in Australia, and yielded similar, if not higher results of obedience to authority. Another big critique was whether or not the subjects actually believed that they were administering painful shocks. Milgram says that only 2 to 4 subjects did not believe that they were causing pain to the learner, but claims that he left their data samples in the data pool because he did not want to appear to be shaping the results and that the 2 to 4 samples would not change the overall results much anyway. I believe that Milgram defended his points quite well and did not appear childish and hostile, like John Searle when he was defending his Chinese Room argument.
Chapter 15:
One of the most interesting things about chapter 15, is that Milgram relates the theories and ideas from this book to the explanation of US soldiers’ actions in Vietnam. He explains the process that soldiers go through from the beginning of basic training to deployment in battle. Drilling hour after hour is not just so that soldiers look good when marching, but more for the establishment of obedience and the loss of individualism. The oath taken by soldiers helps reinforce their duty as an obedient member of the military. The separation of the enemy from the realm of humans, reducing them to something lower than man so that they can be killed easier. All of these ideas prepare the soldiers for extreme levels of obedience, including little to no personal guilt or responsibility.
Book Response:
While Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments raise a lot of concerns, I believe that a lot of very interesting information can be gained from this book. While reading this book, I find myself reevaluating my decision making process. I believe that in a lot of situations I am a victim of authority, led to make a certain choice whether or not that is what I truly want. This is true of parents, popular groups of kids in school, sports teams, law enforcement, etc. I can take any one of these examples and reevaluate my thought process and trace each part to explanations made in this book. I believe that it all comes down to conflicting sources of authority and who will win someones obedience.
I even wonder if similar connections could be made to spending habits, because I tend to be an irresponsible and impulsive shopper. The ultimate authority should be my long term goals and savings plans, but sometimes I end up doing things that directly work against my goals with little to no regard for the negative side effects. I think that large corporations and groups of friends are positions of authority and push their ideas onto consumers. My friends want to go out and grab drinks or go to a concert and I want to go because I want to conform to behaviors exhibited by others in my social hierarchical level, and even though I should not spend the money, I end up doing it anyway.
Overall, I enjoyed this book because it makes me reevaluate my own decision processes. It was not as interesting as “Gang Leader for a Day,” but that is mostly because it is not a first-person narrative, but rather a documentation of a scientific study.
Chapter 1:
In chapter one, Stanley Milgram introduces the research experiment that this book studies. The research study uses a random participant to ask questions to another participant and shock them when they get answers wrong. For each additional wrong answer, the voltage is increased. The participant getting shocked is actually a paid actor, who is faking the shocking. The purpose of the study is to see how far the random participants will go, if they have an authoritative figure to transfer the moral responsibility to. Also, Milgram elaborates on the differences between a personal act and an act done under the shield of responsibility.
Chapter 2:
The two main conflicting ideas investigated in this research study are “One should not inflict suffering on a helpless person who is neither harmful nor threatening to oneself” vs “Obedience to authority.” All participants in the study were males, between 20 and 50 years old. The first 40% of the participants were workers, skilled and unskilled. The next 40% were white-collar, sales, and business related men. The final 20% of the participants were professionals. The victim, or learner, of the experiment was a 47-year-old accountant and the experimenter, or authority figure, was a 31-year-old teacher. The teacher normally turned to the experimenter for guidance around 300V, the learner stopped responding after 330V+. The study measured the teacher on a scale of 0-30, with 0 being no shocks were administered and 30 being all shock levels were administered.
Chapter 3:
Chapter 3 describes survey results where the study officials survey 110 people, who are all psychiatrists, college students, and mostly middle-class adults of various occupations. Most of them agree that study participants will not proceed shocking the learner past 150V, with only 2-4% expected to reach the end of the board.
Chapter 4:
First variation of experiment involved the teacher shocking the learner from a different room, not being able to see the learner or hear them protest. The second variation provided the teacher with voice feedback from the learner. The third variation had the learner and the teacher located in the same room, mere feet between them. The final variation required the learner to submit to the shock by placing their hand on the shocking plate. After 150V, the learner refused to put his hand on the shocking plate and the teacher/subject was told to physically force the learners hand on to the plate. The results differed extremely fromt the predictions. Nearly half of the participants proceeded all of the way to the end of the switchboard, but still claiming that they were acting against their own morals.
Chapter 5:
Chapter five is devoted to telling stories of subjects and their individual, unique reactions to the experiment. Bruno Betta, a welder, held down learner’s hand and seemed fine with it. He even said to the learner that he “...better answer and get it over with. We can’t stay here all night.” Next, a professor of Old Testament disobeyed and when told that he has “no other choice but to go on,” he responds “If this were Russia maybe, but not in America.” Then, Jan Rensaleer, an Industrial Engineer, blamed himself completely and ended up helping out with the experiment long term. I really liked the Industrial Engineer, because I like to think that I would behave like him if I were a subject in this experiment.
Chapter 6:
Chapter six introduces a new twist to the experiment, by having the learner claim to have a heart condition and bring it up repeatedly when demanding to be released from the experiment. The idea was to give subjects more reason to consider being disobedient, but 26 out of 40 still obeyed through level 30. The next variation included a weaker, less imposing experimenter and more intimidating learner. In this situation, a small drop in obedience was noted, but 50% still obey through level 30. They even introduced women as subjects and saw virtually the same results. The only difference was that during the post-study interviews, the women said that they were much more conflicted. Another interesting variation is removing the Yale influence from the studies credibility by moving the study away from the university. The only variation that produced significant changes in results was when the subjects were allowed to choose the shock level. In this situation all but one of the subjects stopped before 150 volts.
Chapter 7:
Chapter seven discusses individual examples of the variations from chapter six. Fred Prozi, who is unemployed, seemed to feel a ton of conflict, but after transferring all responsibility to the experimenter, was able to push on all of the way to level 30. Karen Dontz, a nurse and housewife, was a basketcase of a subject. She seemed like two different people, one that she really is and one that she wants people to think that she is like. One of the most interesting things about Karen Dontz is that during the interview, she guessed that most men would not comply, even though that is far from the truth. Gretchen Brandt might be my favorite subject so far. Gretchen is a recent German immigrant who works as a medical technician. She stops the experiment early and has no problem disobeying the experimenter. She even says that she was never stressed or conflicted, she just stopped when she felt that the learner was in pain and had no problem telling the experimenter to shove it.
Chapter 8:
Chapter eight investigates the possibilities of changing the authority figure’s role in the experiment. In some of the variations, the learner demands to be shocked and the experimenter says no. In this case, almost all of the subjects stop when the experimenter says to. Another variation is where another “ordinary” man gives the orders to the subject, because the experimenter took a phone call. My favorite variation is where the experimenter comes up with an excuse to be the learner.
Chapter 9:
In chapter 9, Milgram clarifies a very important distinction between conformity and obedience. Conformity describes the action of a subject when he goes along with the actions of his peers. Obedience describes when a subject complies with the orders of authority. These two definitions highlight the idea of a hierarchy, which is a social structure in which there is a clear distinction between levels. People conform to ideals and actions of peers, or people from the same hierarchy level. People obey, or carry out orders from authority figures, or people from higher hierarchical levels. I really like this idea, because it makes a lot of sense in my life. I relate this situation, and the idea of obedience, to working out. When I have an authority figure ordering me to perform a particular exercise, I am able to do it better, faster, and with less regard to my exhaustion level. If I were to try the same exercises on my own, without that authority figure, I would be much more likely to quit. I believe this has to do with not wanting to break the chain of authority and being able to separate my actions (exercising) from the consequences (tired and soreness) because an authority figure is instructing me to continue, regardless of if I want to or not.
Chapter 10:
It was obvious to early humans that obedience and the existence of a hierarchy allows for an increased chance of survival. Milgram illustrates this point by comparing a militia to a mob. The structure of the militia, with a clear hierarchy, will not only provide a higher level of organization, but also allow the militia soldiers a greater level of confidence and lack of fear, because they fear disappointing their own leader more than potentially getting injured by the mob. This provides the militia with an obvious advantage. Milgram also explains this idea in more detail by explaining the Agentic Shift, which describes when a person separates their own feelings, fears, and opinions from the situation and executes commands from an authority figure in a way that is methodical and almost robotic.
Chapter 11:
Chapter 11 investigates obedience from the beginning, looking back all of the way to early childhood. At a very young age, parents teach their kids to obey them and respect elders. This sets the stage for obedience. To further concrete these ideas of obedience, kids are sent to school, where a clear hierarchy exists. First, the students are under the teachers, which are under the principal. Once a person switches into the Agentic State, there occurs a dramatic loss in responsibility. The obedience experiment is very interesting because the subject is caught in this conflicted position where they want to obey and gain accolades from the experimenter, but they also feel conflicted and want to stop. However, if they were to stop they would have to admit that what they had done so far was wrong. Since the tasks are inherently repetitive in nature, while the subject is battling this conflict, until they actually take the leap and disobey, they are left with no choice but to continue.
Chapter 12:
In chapter 12, Milgram explains different coping mechanisms employed by the subjects to reduce stress, strain, and anxiety. Strain is a conflicting feeling experienced by the subjects, where they are battling with internal beliefs. The first, immediate source of strain comes from the physical and psychological response to the learner’s screams. Next, strain occurs as the subject continues to battle with the moral beliefs and social constraints regarding causing pain and harm to the learner. Then, some subjects felt that they were angering the learner to the point that they might physically retaliate after the experiment is over. After that, strain occurs because the subjects are receiving instructions from both the learner and the experimenter. Finally, the subjects have a certain ideal image of themselves, and shocking an innocent victim past their protests usually does not align with this image. The gap between these two ideas causes further strain.
Chapter 13:
In chapter 13, Milgram humors one of the alternative explanations for the behaviors observed, specifically the idea that human beings are inherently sadistic and enjoy causing others pain. The main counter-argument to this idea is that in experiment 11, the subject is given freedom over which level of shock to administer to the learner. The experimenter also pushes for the use of all of the levers, but almost all of the subjects do not exceed the very lower levels of shocks. While there appeared to be one or two outliers who exhibit an eagerness to harm others, Milgram successfully convinces me that a tendency towards obedience is a more likely answer to the question at hand.
Chapter 14:
Milgram devotes chapter 14 to discussing critiques of his obedience experiment. The first major concern he addresses is whether or not the group of people studied were representative of the general population. His main argument in contrast of this claim is that this experiment has been repeated at Princeton, in Munich, in Rome, in South Africa, and in Australia, and yielded similar, if not higher results of obedience to authority. Another big critique was whether or not the subjects actually believed that they were administering painful shocks. Milgram says that only 2 to 4 subjects did not believe that they were causing pain to the learner, but claims that he left their data samples in the data pool because he did not want to appear to be shaping the results and that the 2 to 4 samples would not change the overall results much anyway. I believe that Milgram defended his points quite well and did not appear childish and hostile, like John Searle when he was defending his Chinese Room argument.
Chapter 15:
One of the most interesting things about chapter 15, is that Milgram relates the theories and ideas from this book to the explanation of US soldiers’ actions in Vietnam. He explains the process that soldiers go through from the beginning of basic training to deployment in battle. Drilling hour after hour is not just so that soldiers look good when marching, but more for the establishment of obedience and the loss of individualism. The oath taken by soldiers helps reinforce their duty as an obedient member of the military. The separation of the enemy from the realm of humans, reducing them to something lower than man so that they can be killed easier. All of these ideas prepare the soldiers for extreme levels of obedience, including little to no personal guilt or responsibility.
Book Response:
While Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments raise a lot of concerns, I believe that a lot of very interesting information can be gained from this book. While reading this book, I find myself reevaluating my decision making process. I believe that in a lot of situations I am a victim of authority, led to make a certain choice whether or not that is what I truly want. This is true of parents, popular groups of kids in school, sports teams, law enforcement, etc. I can take any one of these examples and reevaluate my thought process and trace each part to explanations made in this book. I believe that it all comes down to conflicting sources of authority and who will win someones obedience.
I even wonder if similar connections could be made to spending habits, because I tend to be an irresponsible and impulsive shopper. The ultimate authority should be my long term goals and savings plans, but sometimes I end up doing things that directly work against my goals with little to no regard for the negative side effects. I think that large corporations and groups of friends are positions of authority and push their ideas onto consumers. My friends want to go out and grab drinks or go to a concert and I want to go because I want to conform to behaviors exhibited by others in my social hierarchical level, and even though I should not spend the money, I end up doing it anyway.
Overall, I enjoyed this book because it makes me reevaluate my own decision processes. It was not as interesting as “Gang Leader for a Day,” but that is mostly because it is not a first-person narrative, but rather a documentation of a scientific study.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Book Reading: Gang Leader for a Day
“Gang Leader for a Day” – Sudhir Venkatesh
Chapter 1:
I thought that Donald Norman’s “Design of Everyday Things” was interesting, but it has nothing on Sudhir Venkatesh’s “Gang Leader for a Day.” Sudhir is a graduate student at the University of Chicago, studying sociology. During his studies, he volunteers to help William Julius Wilson, who Sudhir regards as the most prominent scholar studying African Americans in the field of sociology. He sets off to ask a bunch of survey questions to the poor black families residing in the projects surrounding the University of Chicago. By the end of his journey that day, he had realized a few very important things. The first thing that he learned is that you cannot just walk up to the projects with a bag and a clipboard and start asking typical survey questions. The other main thing that he learned was in order to get a real glimpse into the life of the poor black Chicago project inhabitants, he was going to have to hang around them and observe what their life was really like first hand.
While reading this book, I find that I am hooked, hardly willing to set it down. I really like how brave, or naïve, Sudhir is when confronting gang members, which I believe is the main reason why Black King’s leader J.T. prevented his gooney’s from harassing Sudhir further. At this point, it is hard to tell how high in the organization J.T. is, but it is obvious that he is in charge of the group in chapter one. It was also very interesting when Sudhir uncovers that J.T. attended college, which apparently was one of the last things that he was expecting to find out. Also, the preface foreshadows that Sudhir will get much more engrossed in the Black Kings gang operations, so there is a sense of foreboding of what Sudhir is getting into. I worry that he may get in too well and end up in situations that he is not comfortable with, but I am excited to read more and find out either way!
Chapter 2:
In chapter two, JT moves to Robert Taylor projects to take over for Curly, which seems to be a more prosperous venture for JT. The Robert Taylor projects were built from 1958-1962 and almost immediately after became more of a problem than a solution. Shortly after Robert Taylor opened, it became too dangerous for police to patrol, which meant that no police support, or medical support, was provided in Robert Taylor. While Sudhir was observing JT at Robert Taylor, he was assigned a guard to meet him at the bus stop to protect him. However, it seems that this guard may also protect JT and the Black Kings from Sudhir seeing things they did not want him to, at least until they find out how much they can trust him. Sudhir also meets JT’s mom, Mrs. Mae, who seems very nice to Sudhir, feeding him whenever he is researching in Robert Taylor. However, it also seems weird that Mrs. Mae knows everything that her son does, but seems okay with it. Sudhir accompanies JT on his routine surveying trips of the BK controlled buildings. JT explains the complex web of the building dynamics. Bums and crackheads pay a small fee to live in the stairwells, or they could pay a higher fee to live in a squatter apartment. Prostitutes also can use apartments for a fee. All of the fees are controlled by JT and enforced by his thugs.
Chapter 3:
Chapter three starts off with the aftermath of C-note getting beat up for working on cars where and when he was not supposed to. Sudhir has been hanging around the BKs for one year and it is now 1990, which appears to be the peak of the crack epidemic. Sudhir goes with JT and attends a meeting hosted by Lenny Duster, who tries to teach the young gang members about rights and voting. The gang foot soldiers then proceed to go around door-to-door “registering” people to vote. However, they are so ignorant about the voting system, they are actually registering people to commit to voting for a candidate that is good for gangs’ rights. There is a big incident with Boo-Boo where a local “arab” store clerk was sleeping with her daughter, and Boo-Boo thinks he gave her a disease. She threatens to beat him up and to appease the gang and keep the mob from tearing the store apart, the owner offers free stuff to all of them. Apparently, a lot of girls sleep with store clerks for food and baby stuff, so this is a common occurrence. This chapter also dives into more about how the gang polices the area for certain things, protecting the community. JT believes that the gang presence is doing more good for the community than bad, meaning that the policing is more helpful than the drugs are hurtful.
Chapter 4:
Chapter four fast forwards a bit, so that Sudhir has already been researching JT for three years. Sudhir finally explains what he has been doing to his advisors, who are less than thrilled. They want more focus on poverty, violence, and guns in the community, and less on gangs. However, I do not think they really understand that the gangs are in all of those components of life in the projects. At this point in the book it is very obvious that JT enjoys have someone from another culture document his life. In a moment of stupidity, Sudhir lets slip that he thinks that JT’s job is easy, so JT challenges Sudhir to try it for a day. During Sudhir’s short stint as the leader of JT’s part of the BKs, Sudhir is tasked with finding a meeting place for a large portion of the gang, which he never makes a final decision. He also has to settle a dispute between a selling team manager and a member, Billy and Otis respectively. Sudhir tries to judge the situation logically and decides that they both messed up and the penalties should offset, and JT seems pleased with his decision, but ends up punishing Otis anyway to keep his respect. Sudhir also accompanies JT while he deals with someone who has been cooking up crack for the gang, but also who dilutes the product to try and skim extra money. By the end of the day, it is obvious that Sudhir is stressed out and would not want to do it again.
Chapter 5:
Chapter five focuses a lot on Ms. Bailey, who takes a role of leader and official, who operates in parallel with the gang. Ms. Bailey protects families and provides services, but always makes sure that she benefits from the transactions. One example is when a family loses a front door, Ms. Bailey takes a steep fee from the family, gets JT’s boys to protect the house from vandals and looters, and gets the family a new door. However, it takes much more money and time than should be required to replace a door. Ms. Bailey also protects women and helps provide items (food, baby stuff, etc.) to them, but only if they are not using drugs and are in good standings (paying their fees if they are doing anything illegal). To get all of the helpful items needed, Ms. Bailey trades and barters with local merchants, but always making sure that she benefits something as well. Sudhir is finally gaining trust with the tenants and he is also not sharing much about his research with anyone, because he realizes that he is too involved.
Chapter 6:
At this point in Sudhir’s research, he had been hanging around JT and the Black Kings for four years. When Sudhir discussed his dissertation topic with his professors, they advised him to consult a lawyer. Through a lawyer, Sudhir learned that if he learned of a plan to cause someone else harm, that he was legally obligated to inform the police. He discussed this with JT and Ms. Bailey, and they did not seem surprised at all. They basically said, “don’t be a snitch.” Sudhir decided to broaden his research topic to include the economy of three Robert Taylor buildings controlled by the Black Knights. I think that this was a smart decision, but he still seems like he is in too deep. He also begins hanging out with hustlers outside of the BKs, including mechanics, candy sellers, and recyclable gatherers. Sudhir turns around and blabs to JT and Ms. Bailey, without realizing that he is betraying the trust of all of the people he interviewed. When he returns to Robert Taylor, nearly everyone is against him because they got in trouble. I think that Sudhir should have seen this coming and should definitely take more care not to piss people off. Sudhir also realizes for the first time that he is as much of a hustler as JT and the other Robert Taylor residents. Sudhir also attends Ms. Bailey’s assistant’s (Catrina) funeral, who was shot and killed. He is inspired by Catrina and decides to teach a reading/writing workshop.
Chapter 7:
While hanging around Robert Taylor one day, Sudhir is involved in the receiving end of a drive by shooting. Price was shot and Sudhir pulls him inside a building to help him. Later, JT asks to borrow Sudhir’s car to get Price to the hospital and Sudhir says yes. This seems to be another major landmark in Sudhir’s personal involvement in the gang’s activity. Sudhir also gets exposed to the cops’ point of view. He interviews Reggie, the cop that grew up in Robert Taylor, and learns about parties that cops bust to get a cut of the gangs’ money. Sudhir personally witnessed on event a while back, but he had not realized that it was cops busting the party. Reggie takes Sudhir to meet some of the cops involved in the busts and he is threatened to leave out the cops’ involvement or else. A couple of weeks later, his car is broken into in attempt to steal his notebooks. I think this is another landmark in Sudhir’s research, because now he is in deep with the BKs and the cops. It seems like Sudhir needs to be much more careful and find a way to bow out slowly and gracefully from the BKs and Robert Taylor projects. If I were Sudhir, I would move to another state, preferably far away from Illinois.
Chapter 8:
In chapter eight, Sudhir is invited to a BK senior leadership meeting, where he learns more about the top BK officials. I was surprised that it ended up being a bunch of older guys with families. I expected it to be more of a hardcore party and if their were older guys, I expected them to be as rowdy as the younger guys. Also, JT starts showing signs that he is scared and trying to find a way out, which should be a huge hint to Sudhir to get out of there while he still can. I thought it was amazing that the CHA would say that they plan on helping everyone, but in reality they only provided assistance to a quarter of the Robert Taylor residents. It was even more ridiculous that they were allowing the Robert Taylor building managers, who are also residents, to choose the families that deserved the help. To me, this seems like the CHA is asking for bribery and corruption. I think a lottery would have been more fair than this, but even that would have still been very unfair. I think that Dorothy seems to be the only non-selfish person who is trying to help people successfully relocate. She doesn’t seem to care at all about what happens to herself, and she is not taking a cut or taking bribes to do it.
Reflection:
Overall, I thought that Gang Leader for a Day was a very interesting book, allowing readers to view into the lives of Chicago’s extremely poor and gang-ridden projects. Over half of the time, I thought that Sudhir was a complete lunatic for wanting to be that deep in a violent gang. I was very surprised that nothing bad happened to him, because I was kind of expecting him to be harmed or have to run for his life. However, I am glad that he did what he did, because it allowed a glimpse into a world that most people do not understand at all. Also, it seems that Sudhir did not follow the normal guidelines for an ethnography. It definitely seems like he got too attached to the subjects of his research, to the point that he actually interfered in some of the gang’s activities. I know that part of an ethnography is sometimes to participate, but I believe that when it comes to gangs and violence, the ethnographer should abstain. I believe that it is easy to tell which classic ethnographer virtue category Sudhir falls under. It is obvious that he is the “kindly ethnographer,” because while he seems interested in helping the poor community, his main interest is personal success.
Chapter 1:
I thought that Donald Norman’s “Design of Everyday Things” was interesting, but it has nothing on Sudhir Venkatesh’s “Gang Leader for a Day.” Sudhir is a graduate student at the University of Chicago, studying sociology. During his studies, he volunteers to help William Julius Wilson, who Sudhir regards as the most prominent scholar studying African Americans in the field of sociology. He sets off to ask a bunch of survey questions to the poor black families residing in the projects surrounding the University of Chicago. By the end of his journey that day, he had realized a few very important things. The first thing that he learned is that you cannot just walk up to the projects with a bag and a clipboard and start asking typical survey questions. The other main thing that he learned was in order to get a real glimpse into the life of the poor black Chicago project inhabitants, he was going to have to hang around them and observe what their life was really like first hand.
While reading this book, I find that I am hooked, hardly willing to set it down. I really like how brave, or naïve, Sudhir is when confronting gang members, which I believe is the main reason why Black King’s leader J.T. prevented his gooney’s from harassing Sudhir further. At this point, it is hard to tell how high in the organization J.T. is, but it is obvious that he is in charge of the group in chapter one. It was also very interesting when Sudhir uncovers that J.T. attended college, which apparently was one of the last things that he was expecting to find out. Also, the preface foreshadows that Sudhir will get much more engrossed in the Black Kings gang operations, so there is a sense of foreboding of what Sudhir is getting into. I worry that he may get in too well and end up in situations that he is not comfortable with, but I am excited to read more and find out either way!
Chapter 2:
In chapter two, JT moves to Robert Taylor projects to take over for Curly, which seems to be a more prosperous venture for JT. The Robert Taylor projects were built from 1958-1962 and almost immediately after became more of a problem than a solution. Shortly after Robert Taylor opened, it became too dangerous for police to patrol, which meant that no police support, or medical support, was provided in Robert Taylor. While Sudhir was observing JT at Robert Taylor, he was assigned a guard to meet him at the bus stop to protect him. However, it seems that this guard may also protect JT and the Black Kings from Sudhir seeing things they did not want him to, at least until they find out how much they can trust him. Sudhir also meets JT’s mom, Mrs. Mae, who seems very nice to Sudhir, feeding him whenever he is researching in Robert Taylor. However, it also seems weird that Mrs. Mae knows everything that her son does, but seems okay with it. Sudhir accompanies JT on his routine surveying trips of the BK controlled buildings. JT explains the complex web of the building dynamics. Bums and crackheads pay a small fee to live in the stairwells, or they could pay a higher fee to live in a squatter apartment. Prostitutes also can use apartments for a fee. All of the fees are controlled by JT and enforced by his thugs.
Chapter 3:
Chapter three starts off with the aftermath of C-note getting beat up for working on cars where and when he was not supposed to. Sudhir has been hanging around the BKs for one year and it is now 1990, which appears to be the peak of the crack epidemic. Sudhir goes with JT and attends a meeting hosted by Lenny Duster, who tries to teach the young gang members about rights and voting. The gang foot soldiers then proceed to go around door-to-door “registering” people to vote. However, they are so ignorant about the voting system, they are actually registering people to commit to voting for a candidate that is good for gangs’ rights. There is a big incident with Boo-Boo where a local “arab” store clerk was sleeping with her daughter, and Boo-Boo thinks he gave her a disease. She threatens to beat him up and to appease the gang and keep the mob from tearing the store apart, the owner offers free stuff to all of them. Apparently, a lot of girls sleep with store clerks for food and baby stuff, so this is a common occurrence. This chapter also dives into more about how the gang polices the area for certain things, protecting the community. JT believes that the gang presence is doing more good for the community than bad, meaning that the policing is more helpful than the drugs are hurtful.
Chapter 4:
Chapter four fast forwards a bit, so that Sudhir has already been researching JT for three years. Sudhir finally explains what he has been doing to his advisors, who are less than thrilled. They want more focus on poverty, violence, and guns in the community, and less on gangs. However, I do not think they really understand that the gangs are in all of those components of life in the projects. At this point in the book it is very obvious that JT enjoys have someone from another culture document his life. In a moment of stupidity, Sudhir lets slip that he thinks that JT’s job is easy, so JT challenges Sudhir to try it for a day. During Sudhir’s short stint as the leader of JT’s part of the BKs, Sudhir is tasked with finding a meeting place for a large portion of the gang, which he never makes a final decision. He also has to settle a dispute between a selling team manager and a member, Billy and Otis respectively. Sudhir tries to judge the situation logically and decides that they both messed up and the penalties should offset, and JT seems pleased with his decision, but ends up punishing Otis anyway to keep his respect. Sudhir also accompanies JT while he deals with someone who has been cooking up crack for the gang, but also who dilutes the product to try and skim extra money. By the end of the day, it is obvious that Sudhir is stressed out and would not want to do it again.
Chapter 5:
Chapter five focuses a lot on Ms. Bailey, who takes a role of leader and official, who operates in parallel with the gang. Ms. Bailey protects families and provides services, but always makes sure that she benefits from the transactions. One example is when a family loses a front door, Ms. Bailey takes a steep fee from the family, gets JT’s boys to protect the house from vandals and looters, and gets the family a new door. However, it takes much more money and time than should be required to replace a door. Ms. Bailey also protects women and helps provide items (food, baby stuff, etc.) to them, but only if they are not using drugs and are in good standings (paying their fees if they are doing anything illegal). To get all of the helpful items needed, Ms. Bailey trades and barters with local merchants, but always making sure that she benefits something as well. Sudhir is finally gaining trust with the tenants and he is also not sharing much about his research with anyone, because he realizes that he is too involved.
Chapter 6:
At this point in Sudhir’s research, he had been hanging around JT and the Black Kings for four years. When Sudhir discussed his dissertation topic with his professors, they advised him to consult a lawyer. Through a lawyer, Sudhir learned that if he learned of a plan to cause someone else harm, that he was legally obligated to inform the police. He discussed this with JT and Ms. Bailey, and they did not seem surprised at all. They basically said, “don’t be a snitch.” Sudhir decided to broaden his research topic to include the economy of three Robert Taylor buildings controlled by the Black Knights. I think that this was a smart decision, but he still seems like he is in too deep. He also begins hanging out with hustlers outside of the BKs, including mechanics, candy sellers, and recyclable gatherers. Sudhir turns around and blabs to JT and Ms. Bailey, without realizing that he is betraying the trust of all of the people he interviewed. When he returns to Robert Taylor, nearly everyone is against him because they got in trouble. I think that Sudhir should have seen this coming and should definitely take more care not to piss people off. Sudhir also realizes for the first time that he is as much of a hustler as JT and the other Robert Taylor residents. Sudhir also attends Ms. Bailey’s assistant’s (Catrina) funeral, who was shot and killed. He is inspired by Catrina and decides to teach a reading/writing workshop.
Chapter 7:
While hanging around Robert Taylor one day, Sudhir is involved in the receiving end of a drive by shooting. Price was shot and Sudhir pulls him inside a building to help him. Later, JT asks to borrow Sudhir’s car to get Price to the hospital and Sudhir says yes. This seems to be another major landmark in Sudhir’s personal involvement in the gang’s activity. Sudhir also gets exposed to the cops’ point of view. He interviews Reggie, the cop that grew up in Robert Taylor, and learns about parties that cops bust to get a cut of the gangs’ money. Sudhir personally witnessed on event a while back, but he had not realized that it was cops busting the party. Reggie takes Sudhir to meet some of the cops involved in the busts and he is threatened to leave out the cops’ involvement or else. A couple of weeks later, his car is broken into in attempt to steal his notebooks. I think this is another landmark in Sudhir’s research, because now he is in deep with the BKs and the cops. It seems like Sudhir needs to be much more careful and find a way to bow out slowly and gracefully from the BKs and Robert Taylor projects. If I were Sudhir, I would move to another state, preferably far away from Illinois.
Chapter 8:
In chapter eight, Sudhir is invited to a BK senior leadership meeting, where he learns more about the top BK officials. I was surprised that it ended up being a bunch of older guys with families. I expected it to be more of a hardcore party and if their were older guys, I expected them to be as rowdy as the younger guys. Also, JT starts showing signs that he is scared and trying to find a way out, which should be a huge hint to Sudhir to get out of there while he still can. I thought it was amazing that the CHA would say that they plan on helping everyone, but in reality they only provided assistance to a quarter of the Robert Taylor residents. It was even more ridiculous that they were allowing the Robert Taylor building managers, who are also residents, to choose the families that deserved the help. To me, this seems like the CHA is asking for bribery and corruption. I think a lottery would have been more fair than this, but even that would have still been very unfair. I think that Dorothy seems to be the only non-selfish person who is trying to help people successfully relocate. She doesn’t seem to care at all about what happens to herself, and she is not taking a cut or taking bribes to do it.
Reflection:
Overall, I thought that Gang Leader for a Day was a very interesting book, allowing readers to view into the lives of Chicago’s extremely poor and gang-ridden projects. Over half of the time, I thought that Sudhir was a complete lunatic for wanting to be that deep in a violent gang. I was very surprised that nothing bad happened to him, because I was kind of expecting him to be harmed or have to run for his life. However, I am glad that he did what he did, because it allowed a glimpse into a world that most people do not understand at all. Also, it seems that Sudhir did not follow the normal guidelines for an ethnography. It definitely seems like he got too attached to the subjects of his research, to the point that he actually interfered in some of the gang’s activities. I know that part of an ethnography is sometimes to participate, but I believe that when it comes to gangs and violence, the ethnographer should abstain. I believe that it is easy to tell which classic ethnographer virtue category Sudhir falls under. It is obvious that he is the “kindly ethnographer,” because while he seems interested in helping the poor community, his main interest is personal success.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Ethnography Ideas
Ethnography Idea:
While searching through the ‘A’ section of the 800 student organizations at Texas A&M University for ethnography ideas, I stumbled upon an interesting find. There exists a club dedicated to overcomplicating simple ideas. The Aggie Rube Goldberg Club is dedicated to Rube Goldberg competitions. After a quick Google search, I learned that Rube Goldberg was an American Cartoonist from the late 1800s and early 1900s, who drew super complicated contraptions that perform a simple task. In a Rube Goldberg competition, teams compete to engineer super complicated machines to do one very simple task. This possible ethnography idea interests me because I had no idea that there were a group of people dedicated to doing something as strange as this. My main concern is how often they meet, because observing a group four hours per week is a tough task for groups that do not meet a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rube_Goldberg_machine
Ethnography Idea for Someone Else:
Texas A&M Rowing Team is an organization that I think would be interesting for an ethnography topic. We meet for two hours at a time every weekday from 6-8am and 6-8pm, and on Saturday mornings, so there is enough time for observers to gather sufficient amounts of data. Some of the meetings are on the water at Lake Bryan, while others take place at the Rec. The drive to Lake Bryan is a long drive (~15-20 minutes), but the group tends to be interesting. There are definitely different team dynamics going on at all different levels. First, the team is split into Novices and Varsity rowers, and then even further by gender. Everybody competes for spots in the best boat, but they must work together in the boats in order to balance the boat and race well. One very interesting aspect of the team is when two rowers start dating. According to the coach, ROW-mances (corny, right?) are not allowed, but every semester a few rowers break this rule. If it goes bad, people naturally choose sides and sometimes one of the two quit. Again, the drive is far, so this may not be a great idea, but you might be able to carpool with rowers.
While searching through the ‘A’ section of the 800 student organizations at Texas A&M University for ethnography ideas, I stumbled upon an interesting find. There exists a club dedicated to overcomplicating simple ideas. The Aggie Rube Goldberg Club is dedicated to Rube Goldberg competitions. After a quick Google search, I learned that Rube Goldberg was an American Cartoonist from the late 1800s and early 1900s, who drew super complicated contraptions that perform a simple task. In a Rube Goldberg competition, teams compete to engineer super complicated machines to do one very simple task. This possible ethnography idea interests me because I had no idea that there were a group of people dedicated to doing something as strange as this. My main concern is how often they meet, because observing a group four hours per week is a tough task for groups that do not meet a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rube_Goldberg_machine
Ethnography Idea for Someone Else:
Texas A&M Rowing Team is an organization that I think would be interesting for an ethnography topic. We meet for two hours at a time every weekday from 6-8am and 6-8pm, and on Saturday mornings, so there is enough time for observers to gather sufficient amounts of data. Some of the meetings are on the water at Lake Bryan, while others take place at the Rec. The drive to Lake Bryan is a long drive (~15-20 minutes), but the group tends to be interesting. There are definitely different team dynamics going on at all different levels. First, the team is split into Novices and Varsity rowers, and then even further by gender. Everybody competes for spots in the best boat, but they must work together in the boats in order to balance the boat and race well. One very interesting aspect of the team is when two rowers start dating. According to the coach, ROW-mances (corny, right?) are not allowed, but every semester a few rowers break this rule. If it goes bad, people naturally choose sides and sometimes one of the two quit. Again, the drive is far, so this may not be a great idea, but you might be able to carpool with rowers.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Homework #7: Nonobvious Observation
For our videos, my group chose to start at the front of Evans library and find a specific book by title and then check out that book. The only information given to each participant was the book author and title. This vague prompt allowed for room for interpretation that resulted in some interesting differences. Some of the interesting, non-obvious differences are: What path did the participant take? Did they use the stairs or take the elevator? Did they use a computer to look up the book, or did they ask a librarian for help? How did they react to attention of others? These are some of the questions that I will attempt to investigate in this blog entry.
When reviewing the paths taken by each individual participant, it is interesting to see if they will take the stairs or take the elevator. Unfortunately, more than one explanation for choosing one over the other exists, so I will attempt to mention the more probable possibilities. First, a viewer could consider physical fitness level. The book we decided to hunt for ended up being on the fourth floor of the library, so those participants who are not in great shape may have chosen to take the elevator. Another possibility could be that a participant decided that the stairs or the elevator would be faster, failing to even notice the physical exertion level for either activity. In order to evaluate the videos and try to correctly identify each participant, I would most likely use a combination of these two explanations.
While the path taken is interesting, it cannot tell us everything about the participant. The next difference to evaluate is how each participant actually finds the book. It seems like the main two options are to A) login to a library computer and search in the online catalog or B) a librarian for help. In order to attempt to match videos to participants based on this difference, it helps to know the participants and their personalities. Without previously knowing the participants, it would be much harder to guess which way they might find the book. One participant ended up doing something funny, complicating the guessing process, by looking up the book call number, but not looking for a map of its location. They took off right away, apparently hoping that the call number would be logically designed with floor number integrated into the code. That person ended up having to check the second and third floors before finding the book on the fourth floor.
Now that path and resourcefulness have been considered, it is interesting to comment on the reaction of bystanders. Anytime that a person does something out of the cultural norms, people tend to take notice. Apparently, strapping a camera to your head and walking through a library qualifies as out of the norm. The most subtle of cues was flat out staring at participants. The other extreme included people dancing in front of the camera. While this may be interesting, and seems like it might provide a good set of clues to the participant’s identity, I was not able to correctly identify any of our groups identities based off of the reaction of bystanders.
More than anything, this project seemed to be an exercise in being weird and an experiment to see what we (the students) will do when told so. Just kidding, kind of. Either way, it is really interesting to see the subtle differences between people and how they interact with people, objects, and obstacles.
When reviewing the paths taken by each individual participant, it is interesting to see if they will take the stairs or take the elevator. Unfortunately, more than one explanation for choosing one over the other exists, so I will attempt to mention the more probable possibilities. First, a viewer could consider physical fitness level. The book we decided to hunt for ended up being on the fourth floor of the library, so those participants who are not in great shape may have chosen to take the elevator. Another possibility could be that a participant decided that the stairs or the elevator would be faster, failing to even notice the physical exertion level for either activity. In order to evaluate the videos and try to correctly identify each participant, I would most likely use a combination of these two explanations.
While the path taken is interesting, it cannot tell us everything about the participant. The next difference to evaluate is how each participant actually finds the book. It seems like the main two options are to A) login to a library computer and search in the online catalog or B) a librarian for help. In order to attempt to match videos to participants based on this difference, it helps to know the participants and their personalities. Without previously knowing the participants, it would be much harder to guess which way they might find the book. One participant ended up doing something funny, complicating the guessing process, by looking up the book call number, but not looking for a map of its location. They took off right away, apparently hoping that the call number would be logically designed with floor number integrated into the code. That person ended up having to check the second and third floors before finding the book on the fourth floor.
Now that path and resourcefulness have been considered, it is interesting to comment on the reaction of bystanders. Anytime that a person does something out of the cultural norms, people tend to take notice. Apparently, strapping a camera to your head and walking through a library qualifies as out of the norm. The most subtle of cues was flat out staring at participants. The other extreme included people dancing in front of the camera. While this may be interesting, and seems like it might provide a good set of clues to the participant’s identity, I was not able to correctly identify any of our groups identities based off of the reaction of bystanders.
More than anything, this project seemed to be an exercise in being weird and an experiment to see what we (the students) will do when told so. Just kidding, kind of. Either way, it is really interesting to see the subtle differences between people and how they interact with people, objects, and obstacles.
Monday, October 1, 2012
Homework #4 - Ethnography Overview Reading
It is human nature to be curious, especially about other
people and groups of people. An Ethnography capitalizes on this aspect of human
nature by extensively studying a group of people. Ethnographic studies are
usually conducted over a long time period, averaging a year or more. During
this time, the researcher immerses themselves in the lives of the group of
people they are studying. This allows them to gain a more in depth
understanding about different aspects and daily interactions of the people in
question. Also, the researcher typically engages in the normal group-specific
social activities. Today, I will attempt to highlight some major concerns
surrounding ethnographies, discuss how my findings relate to the ethnography
that we will conduct in class, and explain my opinions regarding ethnographies
in general.
Despite all of the obvious advantages of Ethnographies,
concerns have been raised about ethnographies and the accuracy of the results.
One main concern is that in studying the group, they might act differently
because they know that the researcher is observing them. Also, other concerns
have been raised regarding the ability of researchers to maintain objectivity while
submersing themselves in the culture and daily lives of people for such an
extended period of time. Furthermore, there are three main cases that an
ethnographic researcher falls into regarding their emotions toward the focus
group of their research. First, a researcher can be “kindly,” seeming to be
more sympathetic than they may actually be. This is a concern because this is
considered to be deceptive by the researchers presenting themselves in a
different way than they would normally be. The second case is the “friendly”
ethnographer, which is friendly and accepting to all subjects of their research,
even if the subjects are actually despised. Finally, there is the “honest”
ethnographer, who divulges the intent of their research upfront. This approach
might sound great, but it seems as though this approach has the potential to
ruin the results, because if the subjects understand the goal of the study,
then they might act differently during the course of the study.
I believe that ethnographies are an invaluable way to gain
insight into a foreign group or culture. However, after reading the three
articles assigned I realize that there are obvious flaws. The back-and-forth
arguments between Margaret Mead and Derek Freeman, is infuriating because it is
hard to know who actually has a better understanding of the Samoan population.
If I had to choose, based on the small articles read, I would have to guess
that Margaret Mead had the more thorough research and therefore her results are
most accurate. However, interpreting personal accounts of events and beliefs
can be exhausting because many times the person who is the more skilled writer
or orator will win the hearts of the readers or listeners. The infuriating part
is this choice is usually made regardless of technical/moral/ethical merit. It
is because of this that I have a tough time reflecting on opposing views.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Book Reading #2: "Attractive Things Work Better" from "Emotional Design"
Attractive Things Work Better - from Emotional Design by Donald Norman
In
“Design of Everyday Things,” Donald Norman introduced readers to the
finer points of object design. He explained how designers used certain
tactics and strategies to make objects either naturally easy to use, or
accidentally make things very difficult to use. Topics covered in
“Design of Everyday Things,” included affordances, mapping, and
constraints. Most of these topics focused on the physical layout of an
object and the how and why users interacted with the objects. In the
first chapter of “Emotional Design,” titled “Attractive Things Work
Better,” Donald Norman switches gears and explains the emotional side of
the psychology of people and how it related to user interactions with
objects. He discusses how an attractive object can be easier to use than
an unattractive object that has the same features and functionalities.
This separate approach to object design helps fill in some of the gaps
in understanding related to human interaction with everyday objects.
To
start off the chapter, Norman explains a research study done by two
Japanese researchers, which found that attractive objects can be easier
to use than unattractive objects that have the same features and
functionalities. At this point in the chapter, I thought that there was a
misconception in the study and that by making an object more
attractive, the designers also improved the mapping, visibility, and
affordances of the object. However, the next part of the chapter is
dedicated to explaining how an Israeli scientist had the same skeptical
viewpoint that I just explained and how that scientist recreated the
experiment and had not only similar results, but more extreme results
confirming the Japanese research.
After
explaining the correlated research, Norman then spends some time
explaining why he thinks that this phenomenon happened and how designers
can use this information to improve object design. He explains that if
people feel happier and more relaxed, they tend to be more accepting of
alternative ideas and more focused on the big picture. This state of
happiness and relaxation can be achieved by telling jokes at meetings,
watching something funny, giving gifts/awards, and meeting in a relaxing
environment. This approach would work better for brainstorming and
long-term planning meetings.
The
other end of the spectrum is very much the opposite. When people are
anxious, angry, or scared, they tend to have a more narrow range of
focus and are more apt to dive into the deeper levels of a problem. This
state of anxiousness and fear can be subtly introduced through sounds,
sights, and feel. For example, a flashing red light, fast pace music,
and rigid, hard chairs might introduce the described state of being.
This situation would be most effective in deep-dive meetings, where the
goal is to try to solve a particular problem.
I
really enjoyed reading this chapter, because I can really see how this
has affected meetings that I have been in before. This book also makes
me consider the way that I approach problems. I think that I can change
my study habits to take advantage of this situation by picking which
projects/assignments I should work on at a given time based on the mood
that I am in. Another thing that this chapter made me think about is how
a lot of meetings that I have attended have been poorly executed by
trying to tackle some problems in the brainstorming area and other
problems in the deep-dive area in the same meeting. The meetings that
did this tended to have very poor outcomes.
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Book Reading #1: Design of Everyday Things
In "Design of Everyday Things," author Donald Norman points studies the little things about object design that can influence its success. Most software/hardware designers focus solely on functionality and aesthetics, but too many designers fail to develop objects with easy of use in mind. What I found most intriguing about Design of Everyday Things is I could relate to every single example Norman stated, whether from personal experience or related experiences from friends and family. While I shared all of these experiences, only some of them formed design habits in my mind. This book also made me stop and think about software projects that I am currently working, trying find a way to improve the user's interaction with the device. Norman breaks down the areas of design analysis into seven chapters, each one focusing on a particular aspect of the interaction between humans, their environment, and the devices that they interact with.
In chapter one, Norman introduces the ideas of affordances, conceptual models, mapping, and feedback. Affordances are simply what users think an object might do. Conceptual models are users' mental image of how a device should perform. Mapping stresses the importance of location and orientation of devices so that their use is obvious. Feedback allows users to gain valuable information back from a device they are interacting with. In chapter two, the author discusses device users blaming themselves, device users blaming the wrong cause, the Gulf of Evaluation and Execution, and the Seven Stages of Interaction. Users often blame themselves if they cannot figure something out that they think should be easy. Users often blame random events if they cannot find a true source of trouble. The Gulf of Evaluation is the difference between the designer's mental design model and the user's conceptual model. The Gulf of Execution is the difference between the options a user thinks a device should have and the options actually available. In chapter three, Norman explains the difference between knowledge in the head and knowledge in the world. A truly efficient design will maximize the design of the device by including both types of knowledge and natural mapping. In chapter four, the author explains how physical, cultural, and logical constraints allow users to accurately understand a device with minimal memorization or training. In chapter five, we study the differences between slips and mistakes, and how the difference can be considered when designing devices/objects. In chapter six, the idea of evolutionary design is introduced and we begin to relate it to common design problems. In chapter seven, Norman summarizes the first six chapters into a guide of sorts, highlighting the main "rules" that will help designers create more user-friendly devices.
I really enjoyed reading this book, because it made me stop and think about everything around me. Literally. It is easy to find objects that appear to have been designed very poorly, with little consideration for how a user would actually interact with it. The references to outdated technologies provided comical relief when trying to read mass amounts of content in short amounts of time. Below I spend some time discussing each
chapter in further detail.
Chapter 1: The Psychopathology of Everyday Things
Introduction
In chapter one of “Design of Everyday Things,” the Author, Donald Norman, presents several examples of objects with exceptionally bad design flaws. For example, the author describes a high-tech phone, capable of call-back and redial features, but illustrates how the designers fell short. The idea behind presenting the design flaws is to provide readers with a series of guidelines that will allow for the design of easily understandable and intuitive devices.
Affordances
The first key concept highlighted in chapter one is the idea of “affordances.” Affordances are the perceived possible uses of an object. More plainly, an affordance is how a person expects to interact with an object. For example, a poorly designed knob could imply that a user could push it, instead of correctly operating the knob by turning it. In this example, the designer could add ridges or grooves around the edge of the knob in order to imply that you will rotate the device. Also, they could make buttons more shallow, so that it would be difficult to try and rotate them. This is an example of how to take advantage of affordances in order to make a superior designed object.
Conceptual Models
The next key concept highlighted in chapter one is the importance of a good conceptual model. A conceptual model is how a potential user imagines that a device will operate. The example used in the book is a bike, which is really two bikes facing each other and sharing the front tire. Users should know that the device will operate poorly because they will try to form a conceptual model in their mind. If each half of the object (left and right) operate similar to a normal bike, then when two users operate the bike pedals, the force generated by each user will directly oppose the other user. This conceptual model will provide potential users with a base idea of how to use an object. A poorly designed object will either have a conceptual image that raises concerns regarding its operation or does not provide clues that will help the users form a conceptual model at all.
Mapping
The third key concept from chapter one is mapping, which stresses the benefit of spatially arranging objects in such a way that users will intuitively know what the objects purposes are. A good example of mapping is placing the controls for power windows in an automobile on the inside door panels versus the center console. This location implies that it does some action to some object located on or near the door. You can further improve this design by having the power window control be an up-down switch which will provide users with an excellent conceptual model. Another mapping example is when cell phone designers put the volume control rocker on the side of a cell phone. This spatial location allows the users to still operate the call volume while having the phone pressed against their faces. The fact that the control is a rocker switch, which operates up-and-down, only enhances the user’s conceptual model of which direction they should push the rocker if they want the volume to increase, or go up.
Feedback
Finally, the idea of feedback enhances users interaction with objects by confirming their actions by providing a logical response. A very simple example of this is for a device to beep when a user presses a button. If the device did not provide this feedback, then some users would question whether they actually pressed the button down enough or not. Another similar example is for touchscreen devices to provide tactile feedback to users. In this example, I also wish that there was a way to provide visual feedback signaling the exact location of the touch input.
Another important idea that the author introduces is the idea of blaming the wrong cause in social situations as well. Norman mentions that if we personally succeed, then we attribute the success to hard work and perseverance. However, if someone else succeeds at a venture, then we are more likely to blame the environment, casting the achievement off as good fortune. Inversely, if we personally fail at something, we will blame it on the environment, claiming bad luck. Furthermore, if someone else fails at something, we will say that it is because they did not try hard enough, ignoring any part the environment might have played in the situation. I find this point very interesting, because this is definitely how I see personal successes and failures, as well as other peoples’ successes and failures. This makes me realize that I should try to be more understanding of what all contributes to a given situation.
Furthermore, there are three structures of memory: "Memory for arbitrary things," "Memory for meaningful relationships," and "Memory through explanations." The first memory structure describes memorizing something without being able to relate it to some relationship to an existing piece of knowledge, or without logical or physical constraints. The second memory structure type is a way of memorizing something based on relating it to something else that is either common knowledge or environmental knowledge. For example, remembering that the left light switch controls the left light and vice versa for the right light. This is easy to remember because we relate it to a well known, easily related piece of knowledge. Finally, the third memory structure type stores information by figuring out logical or physical constraints that will help shape our understanding of the object or idea in question. The example that Norman uses for this memory structure type is the sewing machine bobbin that appears to "magically" intertwine the top and bottom strands of thread. After explaining how the bobbin actually accomplishes this "magical" feat, it becomes much easier to remember, because we have placed logical constraints on the information.
Chapter 5: To Err is Human
Slips vs Mistakes
When categorizing errors it is important to distinguish from slips and mistakes. A slip is an accidental, automatic or routine behaviors. Slips tend to occur when two actions are very similar, for example storing your eggs in the pantry instead of the fridge. A mistake happens when a person consciously decides something and then is wrong. For example, I cannot remember whether I should turn left or right here, but my ultimate destination is to the east of my current location, therefore I will take the turn closest to east. If this turn ends up being the wrong direction, I have made a mistake.
Within the category of slips, there are six subcategories. The first subcategory is capture errors, which are when the beginning of two actions are similar, but you accidentally transfer to the wrong action. For example, when counting time versus money we restart time after the sixtieth count, whereas we restart the count for money when after the one-hundredth count. The next slip subcategory is description errors, which happen when an action can be performed on two similar objects and we end up mixing up the objects. The example that comes to my mind is holding a non-edible object in one hand and an edible object in the other, and then trying to eat the non-edible object because the action required to put it in your mouth is so similar for both objects. The third slip subcategory is data-driven errors, which are when someone accidentally mixes up two pieces of data that they are attempting to use for something. For example, if someone is speaking a sentence that they are thinking in their head, but because they are looking at a sign that says "Frank's," they accidentally say "Frank's" in their sentence. The fourth slip subcategory is associative action errors, which happen when which is very similar to data-driven errors, but instead of the distraction being external, it is reversed. You might be performing a physical action, when you accidentally mix up what you are thinking into the action you are performing. The fifth slip subcategory is loss-of-activation errors, which happen when you start to do something and either forget the details of what you are doing, or forget that you are doing anything particular at all. This is one of the most common slips in my life. I will go towards the backdoor to let my dog in, but I forget and end up grabbing the laundry out of the dryer, which happened to be on my way. Finally, the last slip subcategory is mode errors, which are when different modes of operation, which have different associated actions, get switched in our minds and cause us to do some unintentional action.
Mistakes tend to be much easier to analyze because they are usually more simple. If you evaluate a situation wrong, collect the wrong data, or aim at the wrong goal, then there is a good chance that you will make a mistake. However, it is important to consider both mistakes and slips when designing an object. If you can account for some of the types of slips or mistakes mentioned, then you can create a device that is more useful and intuitive. There are many different ways to accomplish this, but the main one that stuck out to me was forcing functions. For example, if you are designing a website form needing a phone number, check the format of the phone number and don't let the user move on until the format matches the desired format. This should prevent users from accidentally entering another number, for example their social security number.
Chapter 6: The Design Challenge
Evolutionary Design and the Typewriter
When a typewriter inventor, Mr. Sholes, was deciding on the intricacies of his device he used multiple sources for feedback. Firstly, he gathered responses and reviews from potential everyday users such as writers. Secondly, there are physical constraints. He experimented with many different keyboard designs until the QWERTY keyboard was chosen as the victor. One reason for the need of multiple rows is so that buttons directly next to each other would not cause interference with the typebars in the background. The QWERTY keyboard became the standard for keyboard layouts all across the world and is still used today, even though the physical constraint no longer exists. There is another popular keyboard format, called DVORAK, attempts to improve upon the QWERTY keyboard by arranging the keys in such a way that the most commonly used keys are the home keys and the least used keys are the farthest away from the home keys. The lesson here is that once a product is designed, accepted as satisfactory, and gained popularity, then it would not be worth it to further change it.
Design Problems
There are many different problems that arise when a designer is created an item. First off, there is an ever-going battle between usability and aesthetics. If one dominates the other, then problems pop up. If an item is so aesthetically pleasing that no one can figure out how to use it, then the designer failed. Conversely, if an item is designed so well that it is extremely easy to use, but it looks horrible, then the designer failed. The problem is that most consumers do not focus on usability when they are shopping for something. Price and aesthetics are the first things noticed. Also, designers may think that their device is easy to use, but sometimes that is because as they design and test the device, they become an expert. It is never a good idea to test something on experts alone. Finally, designers have to please their clients, because they are the ones paying the bills. However, the client may not be a good test user either, so designers should be careful in these situations as well.
Chapter 7: User-Centered Design
Seven Principles for Transforming Difficult Tasks into Simple Ones
1) Use both knowledge in the world and knowledge in the head
2) Simplify the structure of tasks
3) Make things visible: bridge the gulfs of Execution and Evaluation
4) Get the mappings right
5) Exploit the power of constraints, both natural and artificial
6) Design for error
7) When all else fails, standardize
*NOTE: I borrowed these verbatim from the book because I thought Norman did a great job summarizing the points made in this book and I would like to use them in my future designs.
Three Aspects of Mental Models
The design model is how the designer/engineer intended the object to be. The conceptual model is how the users actually mentally perceive the objects actions. If an object is designed well, there will be very little difference between the design model and the conceptual model. The system diagram is best described as the visual portion of a device.
Standardization
There are a few things to keep in mind when discussing standardization. First, when done properly, standardization can reduce ambiguity. However, when standardizing you must be careful that you do not lock-in a standard too early and get stuck with primitive technology. Unfortunately, this explanation does not give any hint at what the right time will be. There will be some arbitrary point somewhere on the timeline of a technology's development when little future change is expected to occur, this is the point that I would argue is the best point for standardization.
5 Examples of Bad Design
In chapter one, Norman introduces the ideas of affordances, conceptual models, mapping, and feedback. Affordances are simply what users think an object might do. Conceptual models are users' mental image of how a device should perform. Mapping stresses the importance of location and orientation of devices so that their use is obvious. Feedback allows users to gain valuable information back from a device they are interacting with. In chapter two, the author discusses device users blaming themselves, device users blaming the wrong cause, the Gulf of Evaluation and Execution, and the Seven Stages of Interaction. Users often blame themselves if they cannot figure something out that they think should be easy. Users often blame random events if they cannot find a true source of trouble. The Gulf of Evaluation is the difference between the designer's mental design model and the user's conceptual model. The Gulf of Execution is the difference between the options a user thinks a device should have and the options actually available. In chapter three, Norman explains the difference between knowledge in the head and knowledge in the world. A truly efficient design will maximize the design of the device by including both types of knowledge and natural mapping. In chapter four, the author explains how physical, cultural, and logical constraints allow users to accurately understand a device with minimal memorization or training. In chapter five, we study the differences between slips and mistakes, and how the difference can be considered when designing devices/objects. In chapter six, the idea of evolutionary design is introduced and we begin to relate it to common design problems. In chapter seven, Norman summarizes the first six chapters into a guide of sorts, highlighting the main "rules" that will help designers create more user-friendly devices.
I really enjoyed reading this book, because it made me stop and think about everything around me. Literally. It is easy to find objects that appear to have been designed very poorly, with little consideration for how a user would actually interact with it. The references to outdated technologies provided comical relief when trying to read mass amounts of content in short amounts of time. Below I spend some time discussing each
chapter in further detail.
Chapter 1: The Psychopathology of Everyday Things
Introduction
In chapter one of “Design of Everyday Things,” the Author, Donald Norman, presents several examples of objects with exceptionally bad design flaws. For example, the author describes a high-tech phone, capable of call-back and redial features, but illustrates how the designers fell short. The idea behind presenting the design flaws is to provide readers with a series of guidelines that will allow for the design of easily understandable and intuitive devices.
Affordances
The first key concept highlighted in chapter one is the idea of “affordances.” Affordances are the perceived possible uses of an object. More plainly, an affordance is how a person expects to interact with an object. For example, a poorly designed knob could imply that a user could push it, instead of correctly operating the knob by turning it. In this example, the designer could add ridges or grooves around the edge of the knob in order to imply that you will rotate the device. Also, they could make buttons more shallow, so that it would be difficult to try and rotate them. This is an example of how to take advantage of affordances in order to make a superior designed object.
Conceptual Models
The next key concept highlighted in chapter one is the importance of a good conceptual model. A conceptual model is how a potential user imagines that a device will operate. The example used in the book is a bike, which is really two bikes facing each other and sharing the front tire. Users should know that the device will operate poorly because they will try to form a conceptual model in their mind. If each half of the object (left and right) operate similar to a normal bike, then when two users operate the bike pedals, the force generated by each user will directly oppose the other user. This conceptual model will provide potential users with a base idea of how to use an object. A poorly designed object will either have a conceptual image that raises concerns regarding its operation or does not provide clues that will help the users form a conceptual model at all.
Mapping
The third key concept from chapter one is mapping, which stresses the benefit of spatially arranging objects in such a way that users will intuitively know what the objects purposes are. A good example of mapping is placing the controls for power windows in an automobile on the inside door panels versus the center console. This location implies that it does some action to some object located on or near the door. You can further improve this design by having the power window control be an up-down switch which will provide users with an excellent conceptual model. Another mapping example is when cell phone designers put the volume control rocker on the side of a cell phone. This spatial location allows the users to still operate the call volume while having the phone pressed against their faces. The fact that the control is a rocker switch, which operates up-and-down, only enhances the user’s conceptual model of which direction they should push the rocker if they want the volume to increase, or go up.
Feedback
Finally, the idea of feedback enhances users interaction with objects by confirming their actions by providing a logical response. A very simple example of this is for a device to beep when a user presses a button. If the device did not provide this feedback, then some users would question whether they actually pressed the button down enough or not. Another similar example is for touchscreen devices to provide tactile feedback to users. In this example, I also wish that there was a way to provide visual feedback signaling the exact location of the touch input.
Chapter 2: The Psychology of Everyday Actions
Blaming Yourself
Donald Norman stresses one main point repeatedly in chapter: “Don’t blame yourself for bad designs.” Norman explains that users are likely to blame themselves and feel ashamed if they cannot figure out how to perform an action that they believe should be easy. However, most of the time this confusion is due to poor designs that often lead to faulty conceptual models forming in users’ minds. He further states that most people feel this same confusion and embarrassment, but are more likely to still blame themselves than to blame the design. This is illustrated using an example of a “return” key versus an “enter” key on a keyboard. This example is obviously not the best example anymore, because those two keys have been phased out and we are left with one simple “enter” key.
Blaming the Wrong Cause
Along with blaming ourselves, humans tend to be explanatory creatures, looking to find an acceptable explanation for any action that defies our previous expectations. Norman explains this using an example of a co worker whose computer is having problems where they connect to a library catalog and then their computer died. The user associated the two events as cause and effect, because they did not have another suitable explanation. In reality, the problem had nothing to do with the library catalog, but this story helps explain why humans might look to pass the blame onto something convenient.Another important idea that the author introduces is the idea of blaming the wrong cause in social situations as well. Norman mentions that if we personally succeed, then we attribute the success to hard work and perseverance. However, if someone else succeeds at a venture, then we are more likely to blame the environment, casting the achievement off as good fortune. Inversely, if we personally fail at something, we will blame it on the environment, claiming bad luck. Furthermore, if someone else fails at something, we will say that it is because they did not try hard enough, ignoring any part the environment might have played in the situation. I find this point very interesting, because this is definitely how I see personal successes and failures, as well as other peoples’ successes and failures. This makes me realize that I should try to be more understanding of what all contributes to a given situation.
Seven Stages of Action
Norman also discusses what he believes to be the seven stages associated with action. First, “perceiving the state of the world” is when a person observes something in their environment. Second, “interpreting the state of the world” is when the person attempts to explain what they are perceiving in the world. Next, “forming the goal” establishes the purpose for an action, or what we want. Then, “forming the intention” is when an individual plans to do something to achieve a goal. Next, “specifying an action” is the process of refining the results of “forming an intention” so that a single action, or set of actions, is outlined. Then, “executing an action” is when the person actually carries out the action, or set of actions planned. Finally, “evaluating the outcome” happens when the individual reflects on the effects of their action.
The Gulf of Execution and Evaluation
The final points that Norman makes in chapter 2 revolve around the idea of a “Gulf of Execution” and a semi-related “Gulf of Evaluation.” In the first case, the “Gulf of Execution” describes the gap between the actions that a user expects a device to have and the actual actions provided by the device. Another way to think about this is usability. Are users able to use a device without strenuous effort being applied to learning the device’s actions? Next, the “Gulf of Evaluation” describes the gap between a user being able to visualize how a device will operate and the intended conceptual model. Is the user able to properly and accurately form a realistic, working conceptual model in their mind? If so, then the “Gulf of Evaluation” is minimized in the particular situation.
Chapter 3: Knowledge in the Head and in the World
Information is in the World
Whenever knowledge is in an environment, the need for people to memorize it diminishes. One really good example that Norman makes in chapter 3 is U.S. coins. If you were asked to correctly draw a U.S. penny, you would most likely place key things in wrong locations. You may even draw the head facing the wrong way. This does not mean that every singled one of us is incapable of distinguishing a penny from a dime, or a nickel, or a quarter. The idea is that when knowledge is stored readily available in the surrounding environment, the need to memorize it vanishes. An example of situations that wreak havoc in this situation would be if two coins, very different in value, were made in similar shape, size, and color, because there would be a high chance that they would be mixed up from time to time.
The Power of Constraints
Another thing that aids in our ability to process information and respond accordingly without having to fully memorize the information is situational constraints. For example, the English language and our past experiences with conversations and stories, allows us to accurately guess what word should come next when trying to remember the lyrics to a song or the words to a poem. For example, if I were to say “The color of that ball is ______,” one would expect the next word to be a color. The word “jump” or “finish” do not make sense in the sentence. Furthermore, if I were to quote a poem with adequate rhyming, you would be given further constraints. For example, “Roses are red, violets are blue, sugar is sweet, and so are ____.” Given this poem, you would not only be able to constrain the possible word choices by sentence structure, but also by rhyming, because the appropriate word is expected to rhyme with “blue.”
Memory is Knowledge in the Head
However, for situations where environmental knowledge and logical constraints cannot be applied to simplify a situation, one must rely on memory. It is important to distinguish between two main types of memory: long term memory and short term memory. Long term memory is when a person must remember something for extended periods of time. Long term memory usually takes more effort to store information and takes more effort to recall the memory as well. Inversely, short term memory is best used to store a seven digit or less number, or a short sentence or phrase, for a very short amount of time. Normally, short term memory is lost as soon as a person’s attention is directed somewhere else, so it is important to not get distracted.Furthermore, there are three structures of memory: "Memory for arbitrary things," "Memory for meaningful relationships," and "Memory through explanations." The first memory structure describes memorizing something without being able to relate it to some relationship to an existing piece of knowledge, or without logical or physical constraints. The second memory structure type is a way of memorizing something based on relating it to something else that is either common knowledge or environmental knowledge. For example, remembering that the left light switch controls the left light and vice versa for the right light. This is easy to remember because we relate it to a well known, easily related piece of knowledge. Finally, the third memory structure type stores information by figuring out logical or physical constraints that will help shape our understanding of the object or idea in question. The example that Norman uses for this memory structure type is the sewing machine bobbin that appears to "magically" intertwine the top and bottom strands of thread. After explaining how the bobbin actually accomplishes this "magical" feat, it becomes much easier to remember, because we have placed logical constraints on the information.
Natural Mappings
The explanation of memory that we have been discussing in chapter three brings us back to the idea of natural mapping. An object with good natural mapping allows the information related to the use or functionality of the object to be stored in the environment. This means that the user will not have to worry about arbitrarily memorizing its instructions for use. However, it is important to weigh the benefits of knowledge in the world versus knowledge in the head. For example, knowledge in the world requires no learning, but is only available in a particular environment. On the other hand, knowledge in the head requires learning, but it can be recalled regardless of environmental hints.
Chapter 4: Knowing What to Do
Physical Constraints
Continuing the trend of discussing design principles, Norman delves further into the idea of constraints. Physical constraints are a very powerful form of constraints. When faced with an object, we can gain insight into the intended functionality of the object by simply observing the physical constraints. Norman uses a Lego set as an example, but the thing that kept coming to my mind is the toy for babies/toddlers where you have to put blocks of different shapes through holes of different shapes on a ball. Through physical constraints, most of us know that the circle block goes with the circular hole, the triangle block goes with the corresponding triangular hole, and so on. No one needs to explain this to us, we try once or twice and learn that physical constraints matter.
Cultural Constraints
Another important type of constraint is cultural constraints. Here we use previous knowledge of our cultural norms in order to fill in the blanks. For cultural constraints, Norman's Lego example works perfectly. When English speaking Americans go to put the pieces with "Police" written on the sides, the are able to determine that the piece should be oriented so that the word will be right-side-up, even if the piece can also physically fit up-side-down.
Logical Constraints
The final major type of constraint is logical constraints, which allow users to use logic to determine descriptions about an object. Logical constraints tend to be very similar to cultural constraints, because they are both forms of previous knowledge, however logical constraints should bridge cultures. Norman continues with the Lego example to illustrate logical constraints. Logic dictates that all pieces of the Lego kit be used. However, I think that this example is lacking for a true explanation of logical constraints. This is because Lego kits are notorious for including extra parts. A better example of logical constraints is if you take apart your blender, when you put it back together there should be no extra parts. I believe that this example works better because we know that there should be no extra parts from the beginning, whereas in the Lego example, the only way we would know if the kit contained extra parts would be if the instructions contained a parts list. This is not the case. Another similar example would be IKEA furniture, but my last run-in with IKEA furniture has left me to traumatized to explain further.Chapter 5: To Err is Human
Slips vs Mistakes
When categorizing errors it is important to distinguish from slips and mistakes. A slip is an accidental, automatic or routine behaviors. Slips tend to occur when two actions are very similar, for example storing your eggs in the pantry instead of the fridge. A mistake happens when a person consciously decides something and then is wrong. For example, I cannot remember whether I should turn left or right here, but my ultimate destination is to the east of my current location, therefore I will take the turn closest to east. If this turn ends up being the wrong direction, I have made a mistake.
Within the category of slips, there are six subcategories. The first subcategory is capture errors, which are when the beginning of two actions are similar, but you accidentally transfer to the wrong action. For example, when counting time versus money we restart time after the sixtieth count, whereas we restart the count for money when after the one-hundredth count. The next slip subcategory is description errors, which happen when an action can be performed on two similar objects and we end up mixing up the objects. The example that comes to my mind is holding a non-edible object in one hand and an edible object in the other, and then trying to eat the non-edible object because the action required to put it in your mouth is so similar for both objects. The third slip subcategory is data-driven errors, which are when someone accidentally mixes up two pieces of data that they are attempting to use for something. For example, if someone is speaking a sentence that they are thinking in their head, but because they are looking at a sign that says "Frank's," they accidentally say "Frank's" in their sentence. The fourth slip subcategory is associative action errors, which happen when which is very similar to data-driven errors, but instead of the distraction being external, it is reversed. You might be performing a physical action, when you accidentally mix up what you are thinking into the action you are performing. The fifth slip subcategory is loss-of-activation errors, which happen when you start to do something and either forget the details of what you are doing, or forget that you are doing anything particular at all. This is one of the most common slips in my life. I will go towards the backdoor to let my dog in, but I forget and end up grabbing the laundry out of the dryer, which happened to be on my way. Finally, the last slip subcategory is mode errors, which are when different modes of operation, which have different associated actions, get switched in our minds and cause us to do some unintentional action.
Mistakes tend to be much easier to analyze because they are usually more simple. If you evaluate a situation wrong, collect the wrong data, or aim at the wrong goal, then there is a good chance that you will make a mistake. However, it is important to consider both mistakes and slips when designing an object. If you can account for some of the types of slips or mistakes mentioned, then you can create a device that is more useful and intuitive. There are many different ways to accomplish this, but the main one that stuck out to me was forcing functions. For example, if you are designing a website form needing a phone number, check the format of the phone number and don't let the user move on until the format matches the desired format. This should prevent users from accidentally entering another number, for example their social security number.
Chapter 6: The Design Challenge
Evolutionary Design and the Typewriter
When a typewriter inventor, Mr. Sholes, was deciding on the intricacies of his device he used multiple sources for feedback. Firstly, he gathered responses and reviews from potential everyday users such as writers. Secondly, there are physical constraints. He experimented with many different keyboard designs until the QWERTY keyboard was chosen as the victor. One reason for the need of multiple rows is so that buttons directly next to each other would not cause interference with the typebars in the background. The QWERTY keyboard became the standard for keyboard layouts all across the world and is still used today, even though the physical constraint no longer exists. There is another popular keyboard format, called DVORAK, attempts to improve upon the QWERTY keyboard by arranging the keys in such a way that the most commonly used keys are the home keys and the least used keys are the farthest away from the home keys. The lesson here is that once a product is designed, accepted as satisfactory, and gained popularity, then it would not be worth it to further change it.
Design Problems
There are many different problems that arise when a designer is created an item. First off, there is an ever-going battle between usability and aesthetics. If one dominates the other, then problems pop up. If an item is so aesthetically pleasing that no one can figure out how to use it, then the designer failed. Conversely, if an item is designed so well that it is extremely easy to use, but it looks horrible, then the designer failed. The problem is that most consumers do not focus on usability when they are shopping for something. Price and aesthetics are the first things noticed. Also, designers may think that their device is easy to use, but sometimes that is because as they design and test the device, they become an expert. It is never a good idea to test something on experts alone. Finally, designers have to please their clients, because they are the ones paying the bills. However, the client may not be a good test user either, so designers should be careful in these situations as well.
Chapter 7: User-Centered Design
Seven Principles for Transforming Difficult Tasks into Simple Ones
1) Use both knowledge in the world and knowledge in the head
2) Simplify the structure of tasks
3) Make things visible: bridge the gulfs of Execution and Evaluation
4) Get the mappings right
5) Exploit the power of constraints, both natural and artificial
6) Design for error
7) When all else fails, standardize
*NOTE: I borrowed these verbatim from the book because I thought Norman did a great job summarizing the points made in this book and I would like to use them in my future designs.
Three Aspects of Mental Models
The design model is how the designer/engineer intended the object to be. The conceptual model is how the users actually mentally perceive the objects actions. If an object is designed well, there will be very little difference between the design model and the conceptual model. The system diagram is best described as the visual portion of a device.
Standardization
There are a few things to keep in mind when discussing standardization. First, when done properly, standardization can reduce ambiguity. However, when standardizing you must be careful that you do not lock-in a standard too early and get stuck with primitive technology. Unfortunately, this explanation does not give any hint at what the right time will be. There will be some arbitrary point somewhere on the timeline of a technology's development when little future change is expected to occur, this is the point that I would argue is the best point for standardization.
5 Examples of Bad Design
1) Road bike gear shifters & brake levers:
Modern road bikes have some good design principles built in to the
the gear shifters and brake levers, but the designers still provide no clear indication of which side does the front brakes or rear brakes.When looking at the bike, you can clearly gain a decent conceptual image, but you still have no way of knowing which lever corresponds to which brake. They also incorporate the shifters into the brake lever, so that you can push the lever to the inside and it will shift for you. This is a great idea and very convenient, unfortunately the ambiguity regarding the front/back breaks makes this an overall bad design, requiring the users to memorize the functionality, because there is not appropriate mapping.
2) Door Lock with ID Scanner
The main problem with this door lock with integrated ID scanner is that there are four possible ways to insert your ID card. Even if you are smart enough to guess that the scanner would need more area than possible in the part in front of the slot, you would still have two options to choose from. I believe that this could be clarified by adding an arrow on the side requiring the magnetic strip, or if they added a picture of the card oriented the right way. Although, the design does give decent feedback by beeping and lighting either a red light for a bad card or a green light for a good card.
3) 1996 VW GTI Gear Shifter
The peculiar thing about this gear shifter is that the reverse gear is left and up, which is easily shown on the label on top of the shifter. So, at first glance this object appears to be designed well, with a label allowing users to create a conceptual model in their minds. However, I kept having trouble getting the transmission to go into reverse. I would push the right direction, but it seemed like something was wrong because I would have to force it into reverse. Later on I realized that in order to get it into reverse, all you have to do is press down on the shifter and then push it to the left and then up. The designers probably did this to prevent someone putting the transmission into reverse instead of first gear, which is usually to the left and up. However, due to the lack of sufficient labeling and knowledge in the environment, I was not able to figure out how to use it easily.
4) USB Plug
This one really needs no introduction. USB plugs are ambiguous and frustrating. Even if you use USB plugs all of the time, it is easy to mix up the orientation because there is no evidence of correct orientation. Technically there is physical constraints in place because if you try to insert the plug in the wrong orientation, it will not go in. However, I believe that if the USB designers would have provided a physical distinction in the plug shape, then it would save us all a lot of time. Examples of physical modifications possible are miniUSB and microUSB shapes, which provide sufficient mapping and logical/physical constraints so that users rarely mix up the orientation.
5) Weird Water Fountains
These water fountains can be found in the A&M Rec Center and G. Rollie White Colosseum, however I have never once seen them used. When I first saw them I noticed the way to turn on the water, which is done by either pressing the bar or rotating the knob. I also noted that there was a pipe on the top of the dish, which I assumed as for filling water bottles until I tried and realized that the water only comes out of the back of the pipe and trickles down the basin. The only possible solution that I could come up with is that this is a "spitting" fountain, which still makes no sense. There are clearly physical constraints in place, but I cannot figure out how to use this device. There is no labeling, no cultural knowledge, no environmental knowledge, and no logical assumptions easily made.
5 Examples of Good Design
1) Doorbell
Doorbells are a great example of a simple, but good design. The long flat shape of the button, without ridges or edges, implies push. Also it is visible, located at an average eye height, and is mapped well by placing it near the door.
2) Truck Dome Lights
My truck's dome lights provide a really nice example of a simple, but good design. There are two buttons corresponding to two lights. It is easy to tell that the buttons are indeed buttons, because there are not many other options for interaction. They do not stick out enough to try and rotate them or pull them. Also, the buttons are mapped well, by placing them next to the light that they each operate. The buttons also provide great feedback by physically clicking when they are pressed, not to mention the lights comes on.
3) Flashlight
This flashlight shows great design principles. There are obviously two ways to interact with the flashlight, one is to press the button which is conveniently located near the lens to imply that it toggles the light itself. The other function is the rear cap is ridged to imply that the only way of physically interacting with the end is to twist it. The button also provides great feedback by physically clicking when it is pressed, not to mention the light comes on.
4) Mirror Controls
While in my truck, I noticed that the mirror control was very easy to use due to good design. The top rocker can be pressed left or right. The bottom directional pad can go left, right, up, or down. From the mapping, labeling, physical constraints, and cultural constraints it is easy to deduce that if you push the rocker left you will control the left mirror and vice versa. Once a mirror is selected, then the directional pad can be used to adjust the orientation of the mirror. Even more, both sets of buttons provide ample amounts of feedback. Firstly, the top button stays left or right when you push it, but the directional pad springs back to its normal position.
5) Beer Taps
While I was sitting there thinking of what my last object should be, it jumped right out at me! Beer taps are a great example of design because they have a long lever on top, which implies that it should be pulled. The open, tube-shaped tip underneath the lever hint that something will come out of them when the lever is pulled. Using my cultural and logical knowledge I am able to deduce that beer should come out of the hole if the lever is pulled, since these are after all located in a bar. Great design.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)