http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/ Beck Tench's webservations on Human Computer Interaction (HCI). Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:48:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-27 Conrad Wed, 09 Apr 2008 01:59:19 +0000 http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-27 Two Handles: one large, one small (this is becoming a convention overseas: a big button and a little button). But an important design constraint here is probably to find a drop-in replacement for the existing fixtures, and that may necessitate the handle design as it is. Given that, I actually like this design, and given the fact that you made the error and it become something you took note of, you might remember differently next time. But, here are some alternatives: The design could incorporate a forcing function that breaks the habit: the handle can only be moved horizontally. Plenty of people kick these sorts of handles, so that might be okay. I don't know how the mechanism works, so it might turn out that it has to be moved vertically to work. Maybe map force to flush volume: press harder, get more water, or map flush count and time. Two successive flushes, means more water. A more complicated mechanism might result in a very expensive unit, and the people who buy the flush mechanism are stakeholders in the design as well as the toilet users themselves. A cost/benefit analysis might show that the expense of the excess water used by accident does not overshadow the cost of the more expensive flushing mechanism. Two Handles: one large, one small (this is becoming a convention overseas: a big button and a little button).
But an important design constraint here is probably to find a drop-in replacement for the existing fixtures, and that may necessitate the handle design as it is. Given that, I actually like this design, and given the fact that you made the error and it become something you took note of, you might remember differently next time. But, here are some alternatives:
The design could incorporate a forcing function that breaks the habit: the handle can only be moved horizontally. Plenty of people kick these sorts of handles, so that might be okay. I don’t know how the mechanism works, so it might turn out that it has to be moved vertically to work.
Maybe map force to flush volume: press harder, get more water, or map flush count and time. Two successive flushes, means more water.
A more complicated mechanism might result in a very expensive unit, and the people who buy the flush mechanism are stakeholders in the design as well as the toilet users themselves. A cost/benefit analysis might show that the expense of the excess water used by accident does not overshadow the cost of the more expensive flushing mechanism.

]]> http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-25 Beck Tench Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:27:19 +0000 http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-25 A good question. My first thought is to have the lesser evil (the lesser water, liquid waste flush) be the default "downward" flush. But I'm still thinking it all through. What would you do? A good question. My first thought is to have the lesser evil (the lesser water, liquid waste flush) be the default “downward” flush. But I’m still thinking it all through. What would you do?

]]> http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-24 Tam Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:22:00 +0000 http://becktench.com/hci/2008/04/03/good-design-meets-bad-habits/#comment-24 Just curious, how might you redesign this to account for user force of habit? Just curious, how might you redesign this to account for user force of habit?

]]>