Gestalt Theory was proposed in the early 1900's to try to understand how perception works, and how people react to certain stimuli automatically. In contrast to the atomistic approaches to these topics at that time, the Gestalt Theorists proposed that wholes are qualitatively different than parts. This is generally expressed as: "the whole is greater than the sum of parts". The classic example is of a melody to a song. The melody is more than just each individual note. In fact, the melody becomes its own separate unit -- a melody -- that is more than just individual notes strung together.
The Gestalt Theorists proposed several principles for how the mind is able to organize parts into wholes. The first principle is:
Pragnanz
Pragnanz is the idea the simplest structure is the most psychologically stable, the most resistant to change. Generally messages can take many form that vary in complexity, features, detail, and so on. This principle tells us that reducing a message to its essential amount will make the message more psychologically powerful. There is quite a bit of research on the negative effects of irrelevant information, irrelevant detail, attention seduction, and the activation of wrong prior knowledge resulting from messages that are not reduced to their essential form (see the Handbook of Multimedia Learning for examples). Logos use this principle as do cartoons.
Similarity and Anomaly
Things that look the same get grouped together (similarity). Something that looks different from the things around it stands out (anomaly). There is a strong case for the use of consistency in design: for example, that all headers of a certain type are given equal weight by being design of equal size, color, and in the same font face. This eases the burden on processing since we can build up expectations of what something is like thus solidifying our mental model.
Ooops... Got to go. I'll finish this later.
9.15.2008
8.18.2008
Persuasion and Ethics
People often think of persuasion as evil. If you are deliberately trying to manipulate people taking away their freedom of choice and tempting them to acts that may be outside the norm for one's community, then you must be in league with the devil herself. Right?
Well, there is a famous axiom in Communication: "One cannot not communicate". I have always found this axiom rather trite and uninspired. People do chose not to communication, to avoid communication, and to miscommunicate. However, if one is communicating, then one is also influencing the person with whom one is communicating. It is unavoidable. In other words, persuasion is unavoidable. Whether we like it or not, we cannot help influencing the people with whom we come into contact.
The goal is not to try and avoid persuading people. The goal is to chose very carefully that which we want to persuade people of. We really have to think about the consequences of the things we say and the things we do, and how we will potentially influence the people around us. Many times, the things we say and do reveal more information about us than the topics that we address. When I look at someone's Facebook profile for example, I am often amazed at the amount of information people disclose about themselves. Identity management is increasingly important as information becomes more and more ubiquitous. Yet, who is advising people on how to do this?
What issues are so important in your world that you want to persuade people to act or believe in a certain way? How about breast cancer? Wouldn't you like to see breast cancer go away? Wouldn't it be great if people got regular check ups to reduce their chances of dying from breast cancer? Do you have your pink ribbon? Is the pink ribbon really about breast cancer or is it just another marketing scam? This is not a simple issue. Framing pink ribbon products as "marketing scams" is inherently biased based on a view of marketers as evil, manipulative, money grubbers and persuasion as evil manipulation. How can breast cancer researchers obtain money? Considering that medicine is so much more an art than a science, how can we say that a product is contributing to breast cancer? Why is that we tend to view people (and corporations) who are successful, especially successful financially, as being evil? Why is breast cancer more worthy of attention than any other social/health problem?
Ultimately, any decision is a moral decision. This is what I truly believe. Religion is supposed to take care of moral training. Yet, religion is increasingly divorced from people's lives. How many people really think about the consequences of their actions? Do companies have a moral conscious? Does the government? If we want to be responsible for our actions, then we have to make conscious choices. We have to be aware of how people and things influence us. We have to change ourselves first. Then we can work on making a better world.
So, my questions for you, my friends, are 1) who are you and what do you really want out of life, 2) what is your vision for making a better world, and 3) what is your plan for making it happen?
Well, there is a famous axiom in Communication: "One cannot not communicate". I have always found this axiom rather trite and uninspired. People do chose not to communication, to avoid communication, and to miscommunicate. However, if one is communicating, then one is also influencing the person with whom one is communicating. It is unavoidable. In other words, persuasion is unavoidable. Whether we like it or not, we cannot help influencing the people with whom we come into contact.
The goal is not to try and avoid persuading people. The goal is to chose very carefully that which we want to persuade people of. We really have to think about the consequences of the things we say and the things we do, and how we will potentially influence the people around us. Many times, the things we say and do reveal more information about us than the topics that we address. When I look at someone's Facebook profile for example, I am often amazed at the amount of information people disclose about themselves. Identity management is increasingly important as information becomes more and more ubiquitous. Yet, who is advising people on how to do this?
What issues are so important in your world that you want to persuade people to act or believe in a certain way? How about breast cancer? Wouldn't you like to see breast cancer go away? Wouldn't it be great if people got regular check ups to reduce their chances of dying from breast cancer? Do you have your pink ribbon? Is the pink ribbon really about breast cancer or is it just another marketing scam? This is not a simple issue. Framing pink ribbon products as "marketing scams" is inherently biased based on a view of marketers as evil, manipulative, money grubbers and persuasion as evil manipulation. How can breast cancer researchers obtain money? Considering that medicine is so much more an art than a science, how can we say that a product is contributing to breast cancer? Why is that we tend to view people (and corporations) who are successful, especially successful financially, as being evil? Why is breast cancer more worthy of attention than any other social/health problem?
Ultimately, any decision is a moral decision. This is what I truly believe. Religion is supposed to take care of moral training. Yet, religion is increasingly divorced from people's lives. How many people really think about the consequences of their actions? Do companies have a moral conscious? Does the government? If we want to be responsible for our actions, then we have to make conscious choices. We have to be aware of how people and things influence us. We have to change ourselves first. Then we can work on making a better world.
So, my questions for you, my friends, are 1) who are you and what do you really want out of life, 2) what is your vision for making a better world, and 3) what is your plan for making it happen?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
