Monday, March 31, 2003

The Neurophysiology of Feng Shui

The Neurophysiology of Feng Shui
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/31)



The Neurophysiology of Feng Shui

The Triune Brain, by Janet Cunningham

There is not one brain, but three, each physiologically and chemically different from the others:

Neocortex - divided into left and right hemispheres and is the most recently evolved brain.

Left Hemisphere - considered the dominant one by neuroscientists because it is the center of language. It is the seat of rational, analytical and sequential intellectual processes. Right hemisphere - perceives in wholes and can signal the limbic system, such as when you experience a "gut reaction" or other physical sensation. It is the center of random, nonsequential intellectual processes, such as intuitive, visual, and associational. The right and left hemispheres communicate directly though the corpus callosum, a mass of more than 200 million nerve fibers that connect the two hemispheres. The two hemispheres must work together so you can verify your intuitive perceptions.

Limbic System - the most chemically active and chemically volatile of the three brains, evolving after the reptilian brain. The limbic system is the center of emotional activity and sensory-based emotional information, including senses of taste and smell, pleasure and pain.

Reptilian Brain - known as the primal brain, in evolutionary terms, absorbs information in the form of energy that flows up the spinal column and through the pores. Instincts of comfort or discomfort, territory or safety, moving toward or away from things, patterns, habits and routines connect to the reptilian brain.

All three brains and all intelligences are working simultaneously all the time...

Editor's Comments:

In a previous article I discussed the Feng Shui of the standard office cubicle. I pointed out how cubicles need not be as dehumanizing as cartoonist/social satirist Scott Adams makes them out to be, with two non-negotiable provisos. One: a cubicle occupant must never be forced to sit outside his cubicle. Two: a cubicle occupant must never be forced to sit with his back to the opening of the cubicle.

I pointed out how properly designed cubicles ensured that occupants could see someone approaching them. I did not elaborate on why this was so essential, on the assumption that most design professionals understood why. In case anyone remains in doubt, permit me to clarify. It is essential that human beings be able to see when someone is approaching because man's animal nature needs to feel comfortable and safe.

The probability that in any particular office some disgruntled fellow employee is suddenly going to "go postal" and gun you down with an AK-47 is, statistically speaking, extremely low. The Left Hemisphere of the Neocortex assesses risks in the surrounding environment according to such "rational" critera.

But the Neocortex constitutes only one-third of the human brain, and the Left Hemisphere only half of that. The Limbic System and Reptilian Brain constitute the other two-thirds, and "When the reptilian brain does not feel comfortable and safe, it sends distress signals up through the top two brains, which can make it impossible to concentrate on the work at hand." [emphasis added]

As Cunningham notes, "Unlike the left neocortex, which is concerned with external facts, the limbic brain gives you information about your internal world. If you ignore internal dialogue [by overriding it] with the voice of reason, you are allowing the left brain to impose its linear perspective... not letting yourself benefit from information that your limbic brain is giving you is a self-censoring process. And... your immune system is connected to your limbic brain!"

Besides, the Limbic System and Reptilian Brain are sometimes right on the money!

Number of Workplace Murders on the Rise over Last Decade
by J.M. Lawrence
Wednesday, December 27, 2000
http://civil.nih.gov/news/othr12272000.html
About 1,000 people are murdered at work every year - an average of 20 homicides each week, according to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Modern "rationalists" may object to this perspective as "subjectivist," even "atavistic," but they would be dead wrong. Objective reality cannot be limited to what is "out there," because objective reality includes everything "in here" as well. Human physiology is real, but so is human psychology. Anyone who dismisses human psychology as "less real" than human physiology is not being scientific or objective, but is merely an unwitting victim of Reductive Materialism.

Feng Shui principles and their western environmental design equivalents were not invented, but discovered. They are not dictated by human beings, but by human nature, and will remain valid as long as human nature remains essentially unchanged. Modern "rationalists" ignore this profound wisdom at their own risk.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: The Triune Brain
Illustration(s): The Triune Brain
Author: Janet Cunningham
Affiliation: http://www.janetcunningham.com/a-msbconn.html
Source: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect
Publication Date: 2003
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Monday, March 24, 2003

Feng Shui and Frank Lloyd Wright, Hemicycle Designs

Feng Shui and Frank Lloyd Wright, Hemicycle Designs
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/24)





Feng Shui and Frank Lloyd Wright, Hemicycle Designs

According to Cate Bramble...

Consider the hemicycle designs that Wright innovated. A hemicycle is not inherently good Feng Shui. Can anyone imagine a follower of the Black Sect Buddhist Church or Pyramid School trying to place their cookie-cutter baguas over a hemicycle? Sure, traditional Feng Shui practitioners have been educated on strategies for dealing with these designs, but hemicycles don't exactly lend themselves to those uniquely American "McBagua" schools. I would suggest that many people who think Frank Lloyd Wright was some kind of Feng Shui savant have seen the Guggenheim or a picture of Fallingwater, but generally don't look much further.

Editor's Comments:

This is strawman rhetoric at its amateurish worst. The authoress first makes exaggerated claims about Wright and Feng Shui that no one would ever believe, then mocks them as exaggerated claims no one would ever believe. I'm not even going to bother with her grammatical errors. No one is claiming that Frank Lloyd Wright was "some kind of Feng Shui savant" -- merely that Wright had a close affinity with the Daoist philosophy that informs Feng Shui. One: Wright was spiritually attuned to Feng Shui even though he did not formally practice Feng Shui. Two: Traditional Chinese architectural forms and details show up in Wright's work repeatedly. Wright's "Prairie Houses" in particular, reveal an unmistakable family resemblance to traditional Chinese buildings. Re: Wright's "hemicycles." The authoress merely displays her ignorance. She assumes traditional Feng Shui rules out the possibility of circular building plans. But that was never the case. True, most Chinese buildings consciously designed to comply with Feng Shui happen to be orthogonal, rectilinear. But this was never a hard and fast rule. See Illustration: Traditional Hakka Minority Circular Dwellings in Fujian. Let me be perfectly clear. No one is saying Wright copied Hakka dwellings when he designed his "solar hemicycle" designs, merely that Feng Shui has never precluded circular buildings per se. The principles of Feng Shui, despite the claims of some practitioners, are contextual, not absolute. Feng Shui requires discrimation and judgment because Feng Shui is an art, not a science. Who exactly has trouble reconciling herself to the fact that "cookie cutter" application of Feng Shui principles won't fly? Nobody except Bramble.

-- Bevin Chu


Explanation: Feng Shui and Frank Lloyd Wright, Hemicycle Designs
Illustration(s): Frank Lloyd Wright's Jacobs House II, Traditional Hakka Minority Circular Dwellings in Fujian
Author: Jackie Craven
Affiliation: About.com
Source: http://architecture.about.com/library/blfeng-hemi.htm
Publication Date: None
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Friday, March 21, 2003

Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? NO!

Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? NO!
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/21)

Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? NO!

The master went beyond the ancient Eastern philosophies, say some critics.

Did Frank Lloyd Wright practice "good feng shui"? Do his homes suggest harmony with nature and a positive flow of energy (chi)?

Cate Bramble, a certified traditional feng shui consultant, says NO. Here's why.

According to Cate Bramble...

I accept that Frank Lloyd Wright was an artist, interior and industrial designer, an academic, an architect, and an innovator. What I do not accept is any attempt by poorly-educated revisionists to reverse-engineer Wright's "organic architecture" into some kind of Feng Shui mold.

Wright pioneered living rooms (over parlors), carports (in an age moving from buggies to cars), and open floor plans (the ubiquitous design of post-1980 tract homes). But none of those innovations automatically generate good Feng Shui, and are not inherently imbued with Feng Shui principles. Nor has Wright's organic architecture gracefully weathered the brutal seasons in southern California (wildfire, earthquake, El Nino, financial crisis).

In 1937 Wright coined architecture as "that great living creative spirit which from generation to generation, from age to age, proceeds, persists, creates, according to the nature of man, and his circumstances." His creative genius enabled him to go way beyond the traditional in ways contrary to the ideals and principles of Feng Shui.

Editor's Comments:

One is tempted to simply ignore the above comments, for the reason that the author does a superb job of discrediting herself. If you have the patience, reread her remarks. She hasn't bothered to sort out in her own mind what facts support what claims. As a result she unwittingly ends up undermining her own claims. I would be remiss however if I allowed her unfair ad hominem attack on the Feng Shui consultant in the previous article to pass without comment:

"What I do not accept," she writes, "is any attempt by poorly-educated revisionists to reverse-engineer Wright's "organic architecture" into some kind of Feng Shui mold."

We live in an era in which anyone can post anything, and anyone can claim to be anybody on the Internet -- and does. According to what criterion did this presumably highly-educated "certified traditional feng shui consultant," base her conclusion that the gentleman in the previous article was "poorly-educated?" Can you find anything in his remarks to justify her apoplexy? I can't. Was he disrepectful toward Frank Lloyd Wright? Hardly -- he bubbled over with praise for the Great Master. So just exactly what provoked her out of the blue personal attack? If it wasn't something he said, perhaps it was merely who he was?

As I noted in my previous column, it is hard to avoid the disquieting suspicion that a certain "cultural chauvinism," shall we call it, lies at the heart of this persistent unwillingness to give creative credit where credit is due. I'm sure even "poorly-educated revisionists" know what I'm talking about.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? NO!
Illustration(s): Frank Lloyd Wright's Jacobs House II, Traditional Hakka Minority Circular Dwellings in Fujian
Author: Jackie Craven
Affiliation: About.com
Source: http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aa110899.htm
Publication Date: None
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Thursday, March 20, 2003

Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? YES!

Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? YES!
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/20)



Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? YES!

Believers say that the master's buildings suggest feng shui ideas.

Frank Lloyd Wright = the American master who idealized "organic architecture"

Feng Shui = the Ancient Eastern art of placement

Feng shui (pronounced FUNG SHWAY) isn't an obscure ancient art any more. It's not even a wacky New Age fad. Ever since Donald Trump called upon feng shui consultants, even the most traditional Westerners are buying into the idea that the design of buildings can affect our fates.

The words feng shui mean wind/water. Feng shui designers believe that buildings should allow for a positive flow of energy (or chi). To achieve this, some feng shui practitioners use a compass and other tools to make precise measurements of walls, windows, and doors. Some practitioners follow more general guidelines. Some rely mainly on intuition.

American architect Frank Lloyd Wright lived long before feng shui became trendy in the United States. But fans often say that his buildings suggest feng shui ideas.

Let's look at what one feng shui consultant, Master Xu Weili, has to say about the classic Frank Lloyd Wright home, Fallingwater.

"FLW's genius flowed from his innate understanding of Taoist principles..." --Master Xu Weili, Windhorse Feng Shui Consultants

According to Xu Weili....

With Fallingwater, Frank Lloyd Wright accomplished the traditional Taoist objectives of meeting wind with water, or what the Chinese describe as feng shui.

Simply said, feng shui means living in balance with nature. Fallingwater represents this ideal. For the first time, an American architect understood Chinese geomancy, and put this to work in his own way. Residents of Fallingwater could dip their toes in the waters, or breath in the clean air of a pure Pennsylvania forest. The cantilevered terraces of Fallingwater recall the great homes of Egypt and Babylon, with secret waters flowing, and secret gardens flowering.

Small wonder that the original family of Fallingwater was blessed with financial offerings.

Editor's Comments:

Frank Lloyd Wright was America's greatest architect. One is tempted to stick one's neck out and claim that Frank Lloyd Wright was the greatest architect who ever lived, bar none. Wright certainly made that claim about himself often enough. It might have been an exaggeration, but not by much. He referred to his attitude as "honest arrogance" which he said was to be preferred to "servile humility". Whether those are the only two choices open to an artist is questionable. What is not questionable is Wright's accomplishments. Wright's lifetime achievements, equal to that of a dozen of his peers, were staggering, and made even more staggering due to the fact that he remained so prolific so late into his life.

But how many architectural historians in the West appreciate the enormous artistic debt this great American genius owed to traditional Chinese architecture? I for one have long held that Frank Lloyd Wright owed far more to Chinese architectural tradition than has been properly acknowledged. Frank Lloyd Wright openly professed a profound admiration for the ancient Chinese philospher Laozi, whose Dao De Jing he quoted repeatedly, to the blinking incomprehension of many linear-minded western academics. Laozi was a Daoist, and Feng Shui is a Daoist art form. Wright routinely linked his decidedly un-Western understanding of "empty space as a positive attribute" to this Chinese mystical philosophy. Wright did not practice Feng Shui formally, but he did practice it in spirit, and with knowledge aforethought of Daoist precepts.

It is hard to avoid the uncomfortable feeling that a certain "cultural chauvinism" lies at the core of this persistent failure to and to set the historical record straight by acknowledging Frank Lloyd Wright's "Chinese Connection". One can only hope this flagrant injustice will eventually be remedied sometime in the future.

-- Bevin Chu

Post Script: Prominent architectural critics such as Vincent Scully have of course noted the "Japanese Connection". But neither Scully nor any other western architectural historian or critic I know of has ever followed up by tracing Wright's stylistic borrowings back to their intellectual and artistic source -- China. Do they really not understand that traditional Japanese architecture is perhaps 80% Chinese? (The remaining 20% is indigenous Japanese variations on Chinese archetypes.)

In certain respects Japan bears a relationship to China akin to the relationship Rome bore to Greece. Just as much of Roman culture was borrowed wholesale from Greece, so much of Japanese culture was borrowed wholesale from China, and indirectly from China through Korea. Just as the Greek goddess Aphrodite became the Roman goddess Venus, so Chinese Buddhism, aka Tsan, became the Japanese Zen. Most of this occurred during the Tang Dynasty (roughly 600 to 900 AD) when Japanese envoys made wave after wave of pilgrimages to China, and with the official permission of the Chinese Imperial Court, copied every aspect of Chinese civilization and carted it back to Japan. Even today, a millennium and a half later, perhaps half of the written Japanese language is still recognizable by Chinese who speak no Japanese.

None of this is intended to diminish the accomplishments of great Japanese architects, but merely to set the historical record straight. Modern Japanese architecture is superior to modern Chinese architecture, on the whole. Among the living architects I respect the most is Tadao Ando, perhaps Japan's finest architectural designer. Conversely much of the new architecture on China's eastern seaboard is shlock. It saddens me to have to acknowledge this, especially as some of it was produced by Chinese architects of my personal acquaintance. China has a lot of catching up to do.

Explanation: Frank Lloyd Wright and Feng Shui? YES!
IIllustration: Frank Lloyd Wright's Falling Water
Author: Jackie Craven
Affiliation: About.com
Source: http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aa110199.htm
Publication Date: None
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Wednesday, March 19, 2003

Nonergonomic! Bad Feng Shui

Nonergonomic! Bad Feng Shui
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/19)



Bad Feng Shui

Feng Shui, the ancient Chinese philosophy of spatial design, aspires to create harmony in your home. What happens when designers deliberately break the rules? The set for the splash TV series Big Brother is a lesson in bad feng shui.

When it aired in Europe and Great Britain, the television show Big Brother became the world's most widely viewed docudrama -- a chance for voyeurs to watch real people living inside a camera-filled house during prime time, five nights a week. Now, the Big Brother craze has spread to the United States, bringing with it a new way of thinking about home design.

The concept for the Big Brother show is Orwellian: Ten strangers spend three months under 24-hour surveillance in a bare-basics, 1,800 square foot house. There are two bedrooms furnished with six twin beds and two bunk beds. The bathroom has one toilet, one shower, a washboard and a washtub. The house is equipped with twenty-eight cameras, sixty microphones and sixty-nine camera windows and two-way mirrors. Nine windows face the yard.

These factors alone are enough to make most people uneasy. But, to add to the general unrest, designers who created the house for the American version of the show drew upon feng shui ideas. Feng shui is an ancient Chinese philosophy of spatial design. Follow the rules, and you will have harmony in your home, say feng shui believers. Break the rules, and.... Well, just look inside the Big Brother house to see the impact of disharmonious design.

For the full article see:
http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aa073100a.htm

Editor's Comments:

It is interesting to note that,

"One of the most important, and most turbulent, spaces in the Big Brother house is the Red Room. Here the occupants communicate with Big Brother, seek counsel from a doctor or psychologist, or speak privately with the TV producers. Designers drew upon feng shui principles to create dissonance... the small room has only one chair. Visitors must sit with their backs to the door, facing a mirror, where they are certain to feel vulnerable." (Emphasis added)

http://www.cbs.com/primetime/bigbrother3/house/index.shtml

Diabolical? Absolutely. After all, this is the room where the contestants "seek counsel from a doctor or psychologist" [ ! ] But fascinating as that is, it is not what amazes me. What amazes me about this news report is how deeply awareness and acceptance of Feng Shui has penetrated the "rationalistic" West. We have arrived at a point where art directors and set designers for a "Reality TV" program in England, the Home of the Industrial Revolution, and America, the most technologically advanced nation in the world, have internalized esoteric Chinese mystical precepts as if they were Newtonian Physics, and are routinely, matter of factly applying them to 21st century electronic media programming. Welcome to the Global Electronic Village.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Feng Shui
Illustration: None
Author: Jackie Craven
Affiliation: About.com
Source: http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aa073100a.htm
Publication Date: None
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Tuesday, March 18, 2003

Nonergonomic! Feng Shui For Business

Nonergonomic! Feng Shui For Business
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/18)


Feng Shui For Business

Desk Position

When sitting at your workstation it is strongly recommended that you do not have your back to a door, corridor or passageway, unless absolutely necessary. This is because a significant percentage of your conscious, and particularly your subconscious, awareness will be focused on what is going on behind you and you will be less able to concentrate on the tasks in hand. As far as business is concerned, staff will be less efficient/productive in such positions. In a cellular office it is usually quite simple to space-plan furniture so that the occupant has 'command of the room'.

By this I mean that the person has a good view of the door and through any windows, without having to turn around. Clearly, in an open-plan office environment it is almost inevitable that some personnel will end up with their back to a corridor. The best and simplest short-term remedy is to position a small mirror in front of you (perhaps on the edge of your PC monitor) so that you can easily see behind you. The small, circular, convex car wing mirrors are ideal as they show a wide expanse from a discreet surface area.

Editor's Comments:

Are you a Feng Shui skeptic? Do you look upon Feng Shui as "primitive superstition ill-befitting rational, progressive intellectuals in the 21st century?" Listen to what the author has to say:

Companies are viewing the office environment as a critical factor that affects staff morale, motivation and loyalty. Feng shui is becoming accepted as a valid method of bringing about real change in people's lives, with large prestigious corporations such as BUPA, Orange Telecom, Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank, British Airways and Virgin Airlines, employing feng shui consultants on a regular basis. What do these companies have in common? They are all extremely successful, very profitable and people-orientated. With salaries accounting for the largest overhead of many companies, these 'blue chips' are keen to ensure that their employees are happy and motivated in the work place, in order that they may maximise performance. Training new people and integrating them into company culture is an expensive and time-consuming business; hence by reducing staff, turnover companies are taking a significant step closer to maximising their profits. Increasingly, companies are viewing the office environment as a critical factor affecting staff morale, motivation and loyalty. Many companies, such as those mentioned above, are discovering that feng shui provides a cost-effective means of significantly improving the quality of their working environment and so ultimately enhances their success in the marketplace.

During the decade of the Nineties, the ancient Chinese art of Feng Shui gained an unexpected but welcome currency in the technologically advanced, rationalistically oriented nations of Europe and America -- the countries anthropologist Edward T. Hall referred to as "low context" societies. American TV sit-coms now feature episodes in which famous Hollywood actors engage in Feng Shui one-upsmanship.

But is Feng Shui merely the Flavor of the Month? Is it, god forbid, the Macarena? Let us hope not. Feng Shui is far too important to be adopted and discarded as just another passing fad. Feng Shui, like Accupuncture, like Chinese Herbal Medicine, like Qi Gong, like Chinese Martial Arts, like the I Ching, works. It worked in the past, and will work in the future, for the simple reason that Feng Shui is grounded in a profound understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe we inhabit. It will only stop working when Nature As We Know It stops working as we know it. As westerners begin to appreciate what an invaluable contribution the Chinese art of Feng Shui is to the environmental design profession, it is high time Chinese design professionals re-evaluated their own cultural heritage. It would be sad indeed if at the same time Westerners were acquiring a newfound respect for All Things Chinese, Chinese themselves were busy denigrating and minimizing their own historical legacy.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Feng Shui For Business
Illustration: None
Author: Robert Gray
Affiliation: Feng Shui Society
Source: http://www.creativefengshui.co.uk/aboutus/body_aboutus.html
Publication Date: 2003
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Monday, March 17, 2003

Nonergonomic! The Cubicle from Hell

Nonergonomic! The Cubicle from Hell
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/17)





The Cubicle from Hell

The author/editor has worked in a number of architectural firms over the years, and he has noticed a discouraging anomaly. In a textbook case of "The cobbler's children have no shoes", design firms whose mission is "Better Living Through Design" often fail to provide a humane working environment for their own employees. Usually those neglected are employees on the lowest levels of the organizational hierarchy. (This is not always the case however. Below is an atypical instance in which middle managers have wound up with work spaces inferior to those below them.) See Illustrations: Bad Cubicle and So-So Cubicle

Consider the standard office cubicle. Scott Adams, creator of the comic strip "Dilbert," has an extremely low opinion of cubicles in general.

"If you put somebody in a cubicle," says Adams, "you cannot expect him to make decisions which are higher quality than cubicle decisions."

http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/news_and_history/html/working_in_dilberts_world.html

'A former cubicle dweller himself, Scott Adams has made Dilbert's dinky domain a prime symbol of workplace humiliation. There are companies, such as chipmaker Intel, where everybody, even the CEO, works out of a warren. But generally, dispatching someone to one of those pasteboard waffle holes is a public, self-fulfilling prophecy of subpar performance.'

Personally I understand but don't share Adam's intense antipathy toward cubicles. Cubicles need not be as dehumanizing as Adams makes out, with the following non-negotiable provisos:

One: A cubicle occupant must never be forced to sit outside the cubicle. The cubicle occupant must sit entirely inside the cubicle. A cubicle containing only a work surface with a chair pushed up against it is flat out unacceptable. No ifs, ands or buts about it. See Illustration: The Cubicle from Hell.

Two: A cubicle occupant must never be forced to sit with his back to the opening of the cubicle. The occupant must sit with either his back to the rear of the cubicle and his face to the cubicle entrance (difficult to achieve), or he must sit with this back to one of the two side walls of the cubicle (easily achieved and quite common). Anything less is flat out unacceptable. Again see: The Cubicle from Hell.

A cubicle occupant must be able to catch anyone approaching his personal space in either his direct vision or at least his peripheral vision. What makes the Bad Cubicle unacceptable (See Illustration: Bad Cubicle) is that it amounts to half a cubicle. Half a cubicle is like a room with a missing wall. It is especially objectionable if the missing wall is to one's back.

Even more objectionable are what the article refers to as

'other so-called alternative office strategies like Hoteling (spaces are divvied out daily, first come, first served), Shared Space (employees confined like two-to-a-cell prisoners) and Free-Address (workers share large, open, hivelike spaces). The newest horror among the boxed set is "densification," when employers literally close in the walls on the workers to save floor space. "It's part of a constant nickel-and-diming of the employee," says Adams. "I want you to work another hour and make the cubicle two feet smaller."'

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: The Cubicle from Hell
IIllustration: Nonergonomic! The Cubicle from Hell
Author: Bevin Chu
Affiliation: CETRA Design Information Section
Source: http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/4814052.htm
Publication Date: 2003
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Friday, March 14, 2003

Nonergonomic! Shopping Web Sites replace Old Mistakes with New

Nonergonomic! Shopping Web Sites replace Old Mistakes with New
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/14)

Shopping Web Sites replace Old Mistakes with New

The biggest design problem of 2002? A lack of posted prices. Inflexible search engines and JavaScript in links are others.

Even after years of trial and error - and estimates of record-breaking online shopping this holiday season - too many business Web sites still don't get it right, Web-design guru Jakob Nielsen says. Nielsen, the author of multiple books on software interfaces and a principal at the Nielsen Norman Group in Fremont, Calif., has released his top 10 Web-design mistakes of 2002. Nielsen said a lot of errors of years past - such as bothersome animated introductions, and pages that don't contain a link back to a site's home page - are disappearing. Sites also are getting visitors to information more effectively than before. "The bad news is, as the Web evolves, we just get to the next generation of mistakes," he said.

The number-one dumb mistake of 2002?

Lack of posted prices. "We have miles of videotape of users asking: 'Where's the price?' while tearing their hair out," Nielsen said. The problem prevails in business-to-business sites, Nielsen said. But even consumer sites can forget prices where shoppers need them - on search-result pages, for example.

Other design snafus:

Inflexible search engines. Overly literal search engines on product sites that can't handle typos, plurals, or other variants of queries, make things especially difficult for elderly shoppers.

Horizontal scrolling. No one minds scrolling down a page, but information that goes off the side is a big annoyance.

Fixed font size. Site designers who rob a visitor's ability to shrink or enlarge type are disrespectful to users - and often make letters too small.

Blocks of text. Sites should lighten up with more white space, including bulleted lists, extra-short paragraphs, and highlighted keywords.

JavaScript in links. A clicked link should do one thing: Bring new content into the same window. Using a programming language such as JavaScript to make different things happen when a link is clicked can undermine users' comfort and trust.

Not-very-frequently asked questions. Too many sites have FAQs (answers to "Frequently Asked Questions") that "the company wished users would ask."

Collecting e-mail addresses without a privacy policy. Visitors are getting more savvy about giving out personal information.

Too-long URLs. Web addresses of more than 75 characters are hard to remember, type, and e-mail successfully to friends.

Surprise e-mail links. It's another unwelcome surprise when a clicked link unexpectedly brings up an e-mail program.

Editor's Comments:

As a frequent online shopper myself, I have encountered these B2C website defects, so I know exactly how irritating they can be. What astonishes me the most however is the refusal to clearly post prices. Common sense would argue in favor of showing respect for your customer by letting them know frankly and non-evasively just exactly how much you expect to be paid for your product or service. Yet on far too many websites that is not the case. Many websites compel the customer to "drill down" two, three, even four levels just to find that magic number. Some websites go so far as to refuse to divulge any price information until the visitor has first filled out a time-consuming online order form providing them with everything from one's mother's maiden name to one's credit card expiration date! Mind-boggling. What impression they think they're conveying to the customer I can't say. I can only say how it comes across to me: they are reluctant to divulge the price because they they know it's too high, and they are stalling for time to "sell" me before they "close".

Paranoia? Hardly. When a high profile US-based franchised health spa opened a branch near me two years ago, I marched up to the front desk and asked how much it would cost to join. The salesperson refused to tell me. Instead, she offered to take me on a guided tour. Reasonable? Not so fast. Before she would take me on a guided tour, I had to fill out a lengthy customer information form. I balked. All I wanted was a quick peek at their exercise machines to know what I would be getting, and a number -- the monthly or annual fee. Five minutes is all it would take. Again, she flat out refused. She enunciated in clipped tones that it was "Company policy. Non-negotiable. Take it or leave it." Do I need to tell you I told them where they could put their membership form, and have never been back since? More recently I noticed the building facade plastered with banners reading "New Low Rates! Limited Time Only!" Apparently an excess of supply over demand in a now crowded health spa market has humbled the once haughty.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Shopping Web sites replace old mistakes with new
Illustration: None
Author: Jakob Nielsen
Affiliation: useit.com: usable information technology
Source: http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/4814052.htm
Publication Date: December 26, 2002
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Thursday, March 13, 2003

Nonergonomic! Windows of Opportunity

Nonergonomic! Windows of Opportunity
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/13)




Gestural Interfaces and Fitt's Law

I was reading some stuff on asktog.com about Fitt's Law, and thinking about ways to make buttons easy to hit. Fitt's law says that the edges of the screen are easiest to hit (especially the corners), and this usually means you should put the most important things on the edges or corners of the screen. The idea is used in the Mac menubar, so when you push the mouse to the top of the screen, you don't have to slow down to hit a button. Tog claims that Mac users are 5x faster than Windows users at getting to a menu as a result. Windows doesn't use these concepts very much, or very well.

I was thinking about the Back and Forward buttons in my browser, and I decided that the left and right edges would make really nice big buttons for those things. I got this idea of "bumping" the mouse on each side as a kind of gestural interface for browsing, and made a program that does that when Internet Explorer is on top and you bump the edge. Some of my friends are now addicted. All you do is bash the mouse pointer against either side of the screen, and the topmost browser window navigates in the appropriate direction.

The Taskbar

Another example of Windows dumbness: the taskbar at the bottom of the screen is about 3 pixels from satisfying Fitt's Law. They just missed. I decided that you shouldn't be able to click below or left of the Start button, and the same for the taskbar buttons. When running the bumper app, the mouse movement is now constrained all the time to exclude these regions. Caveat: You can't use "Auto Hide" for the taskbar or things will break.

This program is invisible, which means that you should run it once, and if all goes well, nothing will visibly happen. Never fear, since in fact, immediately afterwards, your browser and taskbar will have new superpowers.

Full version:
bumper.exe [40k] [updated]
http://www.stereopsis.com/bumper/bumper.exe

Version with no taskbar support [for people who use auto-hide]:
bumper_notask.exe [28k]
http://www.stereopsis.com/bumper/bumper_notask.exe

Editor's Comments:

Opportunities for making highly useful ergonomic advances are all around us. One need not search far and wide for them -- they're right under our noses. This amazingly clever Windows utility ranks among them. If you're reading this article right now, chances are you use Microsoft Windows. And like me, you may be asking yourself "Why didn't I think of that?" An even better question would be "Why didn't Microsoft think of that?" The "Bump" utility is an intriguing ergonomic enhancement to a universally used Graphic User Interface. And while it leaves something to be desired (no vertical scrolling function) it nevertheless demonstrates what it means to "think outside the box", or in this case, "think outside the window". Industrial design neophytes who seem to equate "ergonomic design" with turning everything they see into ugly plastic amoebas need to get a clue.

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Gestural Interfaces and Fitt's Law
Illustration: Bumper
Author: Michael Herf
Affiliation: Stereopsis
Source: http://www.stereopsis.com
Publication Date: Not specified
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Nonergonomic! Jakob Nielsen's Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design

Nonergonomic! Jakob Nielsen's Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/13)

Jakob Nielsen's Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design

1. Using Frames

Splitting a page into frames is very confusing for users since frames break the fundamental user model of the web page. All of a sudden, you cannot bookmark the current page and return to it (the bookmark points to another version of the frameset), URLs stop working, and printouts become difficult. Even worse, the predictability of user actions goes out the door: who knows what information will appear where when you click on a link?

2. Gratuitous Use of Bleeding-Edge Technology

Don't try to attract users to your site by bragging about use of the latest web technology. You may attract a few nerds, but mainstream users will care more about useful content and your ability to offer good customer service. Using the latest and greatest before it is even out of beta is a sure way to discourage users: if their system crashes while visiting your site, you can bet that many of them will not be back. Unless you are in the business of selling Internet products or services, it is better to wait until some experience has been gained with respect to the appropriate ways of using new techniques. When desktop publishing was young, people put twenty fonts in their documents: let's avoid similar design bloat on the Web. As an example: Use VRML if you actually have information that maps naturally onto a three-dimensional space (e.g., architectural design, shoot-them-up games, surgery planning). Don't use VRML if your data is N-dimensional since it is usually better to produce 2-dimensional overviews that fit with the actual display and input hardware available to the user.

3. Scrolling Text, Marquees, and Constantly Running Animations

Never include page elements that move incessantly. Moving images have an overpowering effect on the human peripheral vision. A web page should not emulate Times Square in New York City in its constant attack on the human senses: give your user some peace and quiet to actually read the text! Of course, is simply evil. Enough said.

4. Complex URLs

Even though machine-level addressing like the URL should never have been exposed in the user interface, it is there and we have found that users actually try to decode the URLs of pages to infer the structure of web sites. Users do this because of the horrifying lack of support for navigation and sense of location in current web browsers. Thus, a URL should contain human-readable directory and file names that reflect the nature of the information space.
Also, users sometimes need to type in a URL, so try to minimize the risk of typos by using short names with all lower-case characters and no special characters (many people don't know how to type a ~).

5. Orphan Pages

Make sure that all pages include a clear indication of what web site they belong to since users may access pages directly without coming in through your home page. For the same reason, every page should have a link up to your home page as well as some indication of where they fit within the structure of your information space.

6. Long Scrolling Pages

Only 10% of users scroll beyond the information that is visible on the screen when a page comes up. All critical content and navigation options should be on the top part of the page. Note added December 1997: More recent studies show that users are more willing to scroll now than they were in the early years of the Web. I still recommend minimizing scrolling on navigation pages, but it is no longer an absolute ban.

7. Lack of Navigation Support

Don't assume that users know as much about your site as you do. They always have difficulty finding information, so they need support in the form of a strong sense of structure and place. Start your design with a good understanding of the structure of the information space and communicate this structure explicitly to the user. Provide a site map and let users know where they are and where they can go. Also, you will need a good search feature since even the best navigation support will never be enough.

8. Non-Standard Link Colors

Links to pages that have not been seen by the user are blue; links to previously seen pages are purple or red. Don't mess with these colors since the ability to understand what links have been followed is one of the few navigational aides that is standard in most web browsers. Consistency is key to teaching users what the link colors mean.

9. Outdated Information

Budget to hire a web gardener as part of your team. You need somebody to root out the weeds and replant the flowers as the website changes but most people would rather spend their time creating new content than on maintenance. In practice, maintenance is a cheap way of enhancing the content on your website since many old pages keep their relevance and should be linked into the new pages. Of course, some pages are better off being removed completely from the server after their expiration date.

10. Overly Long Download Times

I am placing this issue last because most people already know about it; not because it is the least important. Traditional human factors guidelines indicate 10 seconds as the maximum response time before users lose interest. On the web, users have been trained to endure so much suffering that it may be acceptable to increase this limit to 15 seconds for a few pages. Even websites with high-end users need to consider download times: many B2B customers access websites from home computers in the evening because they are too busy to surf the Web during working hours.

Editor's Comments:

If something as young as the Internet, which is only about a decade old, can rightly claim to have "classics", then Jakob Nielsen's article is just such a "web classic". Althought it was written back in May of 1996, seven years ago, Neilsen's article is still surprisingly relevant years later. In a way that's unfortunate, because it means far too many web authors are still committing the same ten mistakes!

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Jakob Nielsen's Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design
Illustration: None
Author: Jakob Nielsen
Affiliation: useit.com: usable information technology
Source: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605.html
Publication Date: May 1996
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Bad Ergonomics: Stand-by

Bad Ergonomics: Stand-by
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/12)



Bad Ergonomics: Stand-by "Off"

This portable Event Data Collector monitors heart rates for workers on-the-job. Technically it's a perfect device. In terms of human factors however, it's not. A design error confuses users. To save on batteries, the device may be set to Stand-by mode. One normally expects such a button to switch between "On" and "Stand-by". Here however, the button (in the yellow circle) switches between Stand-by "On" and Stand-by "Off". One really has to think about it: Stand-by "Off" means the device is registering data, so it equals "On". Stand-by "On" meanwhile, means "Stand-by". Logical, but not ergonomically correct.

submitted by Rob van Ouwerkerk

Editor's Comments:

Too often one is confronted with nonergonomic design that would not have cost a penny more to do right -- if only the designer had "cleared the decks" before embarking on the design process. Blunders such as these are the most galling of all.

What went wrong? We can't know of course, but we can make a pretty good guess. Insofar as it reveals the thought process of its creator, the panel layout is almost an archeological artifact, like the famous cave paintings at Lascaux. It is obvious the designer was sorting out his thoughts as he went along. First he asked himself, "What are its functions?" He then ran down his mental list: Standby, Event, Beep, Reset. Then he said to himself, "Okay, I've got the functions labeled. Now for the settings. For Standby, On and Off... for Beep, On and Off... " and so on.

The problem of course is that end users don't relate to the controls this way. End users have their hands full with just two questions: One, "What does this thing do?" and two, "How do I make it work?" End users want the bottom line. They want ON and STANDBY. They want ON to mean it's working, and STANDBY to mean it's ready to work. Actually, to be perfectly honest, they might not even want that. They might be perfectly happy with plain old ON and OFF. They don't have to know that OFF is actually STANDBY. That can be explained in the instruction booklet if necessary. They sure as hell don't want to have to sort through the product designer's bewildering double negatives, in which ON means OFF and OFF means ON.

One of the biggest challenges for designers of all kinds, is to avoid such blunders by figuratively "pushing the reset button" in ones' mind. This applies to everyone -- from the urban designer who planned the neighborhood, to the architect who designed the individual building, to the furniture designer who designed the table, to the product designer who designed the "Event Data Collector" sitting on the table before us. All designers must learn to start with a clean slate before embarking on new design projects. Unexamined assumptions must go straight out the window, because "when you assume," as the old joke goes, "you make an ass out of you and me."

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Ergonomics: Standby Off
Illustration: Standby Off
Author: Rob van Ouwerkerk
Affiliation: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe Chapter
Source: http://utopia.ision.nl/users/hfesec/index.htm
Publication Date: 1998-1999
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Bad Ergonomics: Ergonomics at Work

Bad Ergonomics: Ergonomics at Work
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/12)



Bad Ergonomics: Ergonomics at Work

A clear example of applied ergonomics at work. And no, this image was not faked.

Submitted by Dick de Waard, thanks to Matthijs Dicke

Editor's Comments:

No comment necessary!

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Ergonomics: Ergonomics at Work
Illustration: Ergonomics at Work
Author: Dick de Waard
Affiliation: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe Chapter
Source: http://utopia.ision.nl/users/hfesec/index.htm
Publication Date: 1998-1999
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Bad Ergonomics: Search. Not Clear Search!

Bad Ergonomics: Search. Not Clear Search!
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/11)



Bad Ergonomics: Search. Not Clear Search!

After entering "conference" you expect an "Enter" or "Search!" button to the right (orange arrow). But that is not what you are going to find.

Submitted by Dick de Waard

Editor's Comments:

The above is an example of ergonomic design -- I should say NONergonomic design -- that categorically does not involve touch, for the simple reason that the MMI (Man Machine Interface) is a 2-D virtual menu with no physical mass. The onscreen menu has no physical buttons, only virtual buttons. It is literally impossible to touch them, no matter how hard one might try.

Please note that even if the screen were an interactive touch screen, one would not actually be touching a button, merely the screen onto which the image of a button had been projected. What's the point of all this? Merely to underscore the fact that with so much of our work and play being conducted in cyberspace, what might be termed "virtual ergonomics" or perhaps "cybernomics" is becoming more and more relevant.

Isn't it bad enough that inadequate attention has been paid to ergonomics in physical space? The last thing we need is to replicate the same mistakes in cyberspace. Ergonomic interfaces in cyberspace involve zero manufacturing costs. We are talking about GUIs here folks. Graphic User Interfaces. No physical mass involved. What possible excuse can we make for lousy ergonomics in an onscreen Windows menu? That a more ergonomic interface "would have cost more to manufacture?"

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Ergonomics: Search. Not Clear Search!
Illustration: Search. Not Clear Search!
Author: Dick de Waard
Affiliation: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe Chapter
Source: http://utopia.ision.nl/users/hfesec/index.htm
Publication Date: 1998-1999
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Wednesday, March 5, 2003

Bad Designs: Who Left the Coffee Maker On?

Bad Designs: Who Left the Coffee Maker On?
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/05)



Bad Designs: Who Left the Coffee Maker On?

This picture shows my coffee maker. It works pretty well except for one problem. The on/off switch in front of the coffee maker located about 1/2 inch above the bottom can be easily activated by accidently pushing a sponge or dinner plate against it. I noticed this problem when the cleaning lady accidently turned it on, twice, while cleaning the kitchen. Good thing it didn't burn the house down.

Design Recommendations:

When you decide where to place a control, you need to consider the environment it is used in.

Editor's Comments:

This example provides a clue as to why good design is so rare. Good design is no easy matter. Good design does not "just happen". If a design "just happens" chances are it's bad design. Even Germany's Braun, one of the finest appliance manufacturers in the world, with some of the best industrial designers in their employ can screw up on occasion. [Full Disclosure: I myself am the proud owner of many well-designed Braun and Krups appliances.]

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Designs: Who Left the Coffee Maker On?
Illustration: Bad Designs: Who Left the Coffee Maker On?
Author: Michael Darnell
Affiliation: Bad Designs
Source: www.baddesigns.com
Publication Date: 1996-1999
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect

Bad Designs: Pointer on Audio Tape

Bad Designs: Pointer on Audio Tape
[人因工程 ]
(2003/03/05)



Bad Designs: Pointer on Audio Tape

Guess where you must start to peel off the plastic packing material?

Opening a video or audio cassette tape is always frustrating. The plastic packing material fits tightly around the box, and it is difficult to find out where to open it. The manufacturer of this audio tape understands the problem and promises "easy opening". Try it for yourself, and either click on the blue or white area, depending upon where you expect you have to start peeling off the plastic.

Editor's Comments:

Give the manufacturer credit for good intentions at least. Unfortunately they failed to test the product with a focus group before putting it into production. They would have quickly discovered that most people do not interpret the instructions the way they imagined. Again we are reminded of the critical importance of "iterative design", which is basically a fancy term for "reality check".

-- Bevin Chu

Explanation: Bad Designs: Pointer on Audio Tape
Illustration: Bad Designs: Pointer on Audio Tape
Author: Dick de Waard
Affiliation: Bad Designs
Source: www.baddesigns.com
Publication Date: 1996-1999
Original Language: English
Editor: Bevin Chu, Registered Architect