In this section I will be referring to aspects of usability in relation to publication design, rather than web design, as this is an area of design with little research relating to usability.
The physical nature of reading, and the relationship we develop with a publication, may not be the first think we think of when read, however, when reading, we treat letters as individual physical objects, and the text is viewed as a ‘physical landscape’ in its entirety (Jabr, 2013). The reader identifies “landmarks” which can be important information or concepts, routes are then built between the landmarks, such as hierarchical relationships or in logical positions, until finally the landmarks and relationships are integrated into a cognitive map (Shi, Tang and Yin, 2020). The individual reading will create a mental representation of the text with structure and meaning combined as one, it is suggested that these representations are similar to mental maps of cities or countryside (Jabr, 2013).
To assist the development of a mental map spaciotemporal markers are made, this aids memory and allows the reader to recall the location of a section of information or an image within the publication (Mangen, Walgermo and Brønnick, 2013). This can be explained by the physicality of a book, the reader can hold the text and ‘sense kinesthetically, their page by page progress through the text’ (Mangen and Kuiken, 2014, p. 152), [EC1] whereas on screen readers can physically see but not interact with the text to the same kinaesthetic extent (Mangen and Kuiken, 2014). [SJ2]
This mental image we generate while reading is one that can aid information retention, however there are design principles that can encourage or discourage this.
Navigation is a key element of retention, Singer and Alexander (2016) suggest a navigation issue to consider is ‘the nature in which the mediums determine one’s access to the texts in their entirety’ (Singer and Alexander, 2016, pg 13). Since books and publications are controlled by the reader, they determine the pace and order themselves (Mayer, Hegarty, Mayer and Campbell, 2005). It is this access, which builds on visual as well as tactile cues, that allows the audience to see and feel the spacial [SJ3] and physical depth of the text to strengthen the spaciotemporal cues they create (Mangen, Walgermo and Brønnick, 2013). [SJ4]
A Mangen, Walgermo and Brønnick [SJ5] study (2013) of student comprehension showed that ‘those who read in printed scored significantly better than those who studied digitally ‘and that these issues were related to the navigation of the document. This may be due to the use of scrolling to navigate the text creating a ‘spatial instability’ negatively affecting the readers mental map of the text (Baccino, 2004; Eklundh, 1992; Piolat, Roussey, & Thunin, 1997).[EC6] [SJ7] ’ [EC8] [SJ9]
A secondary element that can affect retention, as well as comprehension, is the level of interruption within the text, not from an external source but from within the layout of the text itself. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML) incorporates this as one of the key principles; extraneous information can distract the audience’s attention from essential information (Guo, Zhang, Wright, and McTigue, 2020). This can be an excess of information, making it hard for the audience to find the key facts in the text, or an undesirable application of design principles.
Figure 1 is a page taken from Plotnik and Kouyoumdjian’s publication ‘Introduction to Psychology’ (2013), the publication the design of the book aims to make ‘even the toughest concepts engaging and entertaining’. To do this the pages are individually planned and organised to incorporate visual cues to help the audience remember the information, it also incorporates “chunking”, [SJ10] a psychology supported method of breaking concepts into small sections to be easily digested at the audience’s own pace.
This [SJ11] example however has been considered from a psychology perspective over a practical one, the eye has little room to relax on the page and take in the information it has just read. The use of “chunking” has had he adverse effect and forces a large amount of extraneous processing, directly going again a key principle of CMTL, as design principles such as line length and grid [SJ12] systems haven’t [SJ13] been considered.
The aim to for the book to be ‘engaging and entertaining’ however as the aesthetics have been neglected a reader wouldn’t want to engage as it isn’t visually appealing. The inclusion of titles, subtitles, captions and illustrations, can be used to help the audience read the text more quickly and understand the content better. (Muller-Brockmann, 2019) when used appropriately, however here this isn’t the case. Design principles need to be applied correctly[SJ14] in order to develop a visually engaging and easily digested design, otherwise it comes at the cost of little retention and poor comprehension.
When incorporating illustrations into publication it is suggested this improves comprehension, as shown in a study by Lai and Newby (2012) when investigating the impact of static and animated graphics on complex learning tasks thereby supporting the multimedia principle of learning.[EC15]
Design principles and usability are integral within publication design to aid information retention and learning.
> Outline principles and importance (type, line length, serif, non serif)
> Then could go into joseph muller-brockmann and discussion about grids and page layout, designing for ease and directing the audience to see what you want when. Relate this to chunking and showcase positive layout (analyse it).
[EC1]Not sure how to reference quote in text?
[SJ2]No need to include the second refeence. The quote reference is fine just drop the ‘g’ in pg.
[SJ3]Spatial. Remember to proofread before sending drafts.
[SJ4]Mangen et al
[SJ5]Put this in the brackets but 3+ authors is Mangen et al
[EC6]This is included in the quote from the source I found, I didn’t find these references myself. Shall I include them or not? Could I include them if I read and agree with the statement?
[SJ7]It doesn’t work because you are discussing the first group of authors. Only use this other source if you are going to get into it in the same way.
[EC8]Don’t know if this section is really relevant, feels like I might be repeating myself too many times.
[SJ9]Make this part of the previous chapter since you reference the authors there. Maybe reduce it down to one sentence – Mangen and colleagues found that…because…
[SJ10]Reference?
[SJ11]Same paragraph?
[SJ12]Reference? A bit more discussion of design principles and how they improve page navigation - hierarchy
[SJ13]Casual.
[SJ14]Too forceful. Also, this all seems to be related to the same thing. Do they need to be joined in one paragraph and can you be a bit more direct and concise?
[EC15]Wanting to include this point but not so sure where.
No comments:
Post a Comment