Balancing form and function is not a new challenge. When deciding what matters more, usability has dominated the conversation within the world of Human-Centered Interaction/ Computing (HCI/ HCC) and has often outweighed form. This can be contributed to the fact that practitioners and researchers are introduced to the usability principles developed by Nielsen Norman Group within their first years of study. These guiding principles have been in place for well over a decade and continue to be used when discussing functionality and design of a system with discussions regarding form (visual appearance) being after thought.

Early work within the HCC/HCI community tended to focused on usability of the design for the end-user with visual aesthetics considerations but on the backside [3]. In recent years the focus has shifted towards balancing form and function within design [2, 3]. This shift may be driven by user understanding and interaction of technology, as well as user expectations evolving over time.

In order to make products marketable and profitable, looks and presentation matter. Lets face it, its why companies like Apple are hugely successful. In order to keep up with evolving user expectations, HCI/HCC needed to shift focus from not just usability but also how aesthetics impact users’ precipitations. Through understanding how aesthetics impact user affect we can begin to form a clearer picture of the user, their expectations and areas of focus/ engagement for a particular product.

Desmet et al., introduced two different frameworks to evaluate the product experience and the emotions the product elicits [1, 2]. In one of Desmet’s proposed frameworks, it sets-up the foundation for examining how to incorporate usability while considering user affect [1,2]. By understanding what emotions the design elicits we can preform a deeper analysis on usability factors. Through this designers can determine what features to keep, improve, or discard based on the intended affect they are designing to elicit from the user. One factor that is hard to control is the overall user affect before engaging with a product and/or evaluation. Researchers have found that if users are in a positive mood they are more likely to positively evaluate the product and engage while users with a negative mood are more likely to negatively evaluate the product [1]. Further, findings have shown that if the product elicits positive or negative emotions, those associations have far reaching implications which can lead to a company succeeding or failing. While it is difficult to understand and evaluate user affect, it is still critical to the products success.

So how do we tackle the challenge of designing for form, function or both in the world of human-centered computing/ human-centered interaction (HCC/ HCI)?

Well, as the famous HCC/HCI adage goes, it simply depends. In proposing a emotion driven design framework for affect evaluation, Desmet laid out four steps that designers should consider. Step 1: Design theme, Step 2: Concern Profile, Step 3: Product Profile, Step 4: Product Design. Through this evaluations, designers can put the desired affect in the forefront while balancing the usability of the design.

Why is this important?

By considering these factors, designers are able to effectively design a system that supports the users intended goals. For example, if a user is utilizing a system to make a serious decision (e.g. health, financial, etc), chances are users would prefer a system that is simple and does not have complex visualization. The system would need to be designed in a way to maximize user decision making while being easy to use and not needing to navigate.

In the age of marketing and making the best looking interface/ product, designers have to balance aesthetics with usability. It is noted during the 2022 CHI conference that visual evaluations and standards have not changed for the better part of two decades. Further research and guidance needs to be developed in order to create a set of principles that guide designers in creating a system that are visually engaging, usable/effective, and elicits the desired affect.

Currently, there are no overarching guiding principles and just frameworks laid out in research papers that unfortunately go forgotten and/or are not accessible to practitioners in the field. One can argue that there needs to be additional “gold” standard principles much like those developed by the Nielsen Norman’s, that needs to be utilized through out HCI/HCC. Through this, we can begin to harmonize design practices and continue to put users first.

Article References

[1] P.M.A. Desmet. 2010. Three levels of product emotion. Diopd.org. Retrieved May 2, 2022 from https://diopd.org/three-levels-of-product-emotion/

[2] Pieter Desmet and Paul Hekkert. 2007. Framework of Product Experience. Diopd.org. Retrieved from https://diopd.org/framework-of-product-experience/

[3] N Tractinsky, A.S Katz, and D Ikar. 2000. What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers 13, 2 (December 2000), 127–145. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0953-5438(00)00031-x