Image: Yuji Sakai Getty Images
In Brief
- People prefer big objects to small ones, round forms to sharp ones and complex designs to simpler renditions.
- Observers often pick a prototype as prettiest, but these “average” examples of a face, coach or pattern can bore an expert or even someone in a good mood.
- After a month of using a product, how the object feels is generally more important than how it looks.
Walking down a residential street in the evening, you might find yourself glancing through the brightly lit windows of the houses you pass. As you peek inside, you take stock of the occupants’ selections: the mahogany chaise lounge with the curved armrests in one house, the sleek leather couches and minimalist paintings in another.
Each person’s aesthetic taste seems distinct, and yet that perception belies a large body of shared preferences. Our team at the University of Vienna, among others, has sought to unravel the patterns and principles behind people’s emotional reactions to objects. Although trends drive certain design decisions, scientists have identified fundamental properties of the mind that consistently dictate which products people tend to like and dislike. Psychologists are now better equipped than ever to explain how you came to choose your belongings in the first place. They can also begin to decipher why you continue to love certain purchases long after they have lost their initial shine, whereas others land in the trash.
This article was originally published with the title Thinking by Design.
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentA good friend of mine, who is a therapist, tells me that much of the use of psychology is for marketing and advertising, rather than mental health.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI attribute how little I care about style, and to what anyone thinks of my preferences, to the fact that I long ago quit watching TV. It is society's primary source of manufactured dissatisfaction, as well as the delusion that buying what is advertised will cure the discontent that it creates.
The price of constantly being told that we are not enough, or do not have enough, can probably be measured in sales of antidepressants.
I didn't get the rest of the article, but I agree that it might be better titled "Programmable Market Demand".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI didn't get the rest of the article, but I agree that it might be better titled "Programmable Market Demand".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree with you, but also note that, more often than not, it is always the case. History shows that you are right through and through. We are dealing with situations in which: people do not support you, either because: ==> they have no time to spare for it; or ==> they have no prerequisites to comprehend it; or ==> they want nothing more out of knowledge than ability to manipulate the masses; or ==> they hate to see their schema of power centers having been built up being altered; or ==> they couldn’t care less no matter what happens.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this'The price of constantly being told that we are not enough, or do not have enough, can probably be measured in sales of antidepressants.'
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd also I suspect in looting and destruction of property as is happening on the streets of some UK cities at the moment.
The need to go on acquiring more and more material stuff is destroying us as individuals and as a species.
The riots on the UK streets are nothing more than what any rebellion, riot or protest is ever about, the deprivation of something.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDespite what the British media is portraying at the moment as an opportunist criminal act, if you look beneath the surface it is as valid a protest as any with the participants not being articulate nor educated enough to realise they are making a protest albeit in the wrong way. Although not many people see it beyond face value of unexcusable thuggery. Anyone who is aware of Jeff Hawkins theory would know we are a sum of predictions based on experience. The individuals involved are from deprived environments of 2nd/3rd/4th generation deprived families and know nothing better than minimal discipline and a misinterpreted need for money with their parents being from extremely poor backgrounds.
There is a deeper social aspect that goes beyond government, media and advertising that is in urgent need of being addressed. None of them should bare as much weight as they do on our preference, status or opinion
psittacid has a point though, it seems the less aware you are of your deprivation the more content you are with life.
I agree, those points pretty much sum up all of the possible attitudes that are applicable to nearly every situation including the UK riots. with the addition of in the case of the riots ===>they hate to see you with something they haven't got ===orflipside===> they don't see you as having any less than them =or==>they feel you don't deserve what they have
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust answer once and for all: is it Universal?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this