Short-Term Memory Limitations and Technology Design

Short-term memory and working memory largely influence the way we design interfaces. Why are control panels, from car instrument panels to cockpit controls, designed the way they are designed? Why is the layout of the iPhone so appealing to its users? Why can we sometimes navigate iPhones and apps without even looking at the screen?

Most interfaces are designed to appeal to human’s short term memory and working memory. Take cockpit controls. Most aircrafts use a T-shape arrangement: altitude indicator is at the top, heading indicator is underneath the altitude indicator, speed is to the left, and altimeter is on the right.

This T-shape is a good example of how an interface can be designed for short-term memory and working memory. Short-term memory can only handle small amounts of information; therefore, a large, complicated control panel without any organization wouldn’t be easy to store in short-term memory. But, when these confusing dials and gauges are arranged into a familiar shape, short-term memory can store their location and meaning more easily. It is also more conducive to working memory; the specific arrangement of the gauges can help the pilot to process what each gauge means and determine whether or not they are cruising at a proper altitude, in the correct direction, etc.

How are the interfaces of things such as iPhones and apps designed to benefit our short-term and working memory? The simple and navigable interface of the iPhone is very conducive to short-term memory and working. Color plays a big part remembering the meaning of all those little square icons on your screen.

Which display is more memorable?

There are 24 icons on the iPhone screen; without the brightly colored display, it might be much more difficult to tell all of them apart. If one looks closely, the icons for FaceTime, Phone, and Messages, are all green; they are also the 3 ways you can communicate with your contacts. Because these 3 icons are the same color, it is easier to remember that they have similar purposes. The icons for the iTunes Store and Music would be very similar, if it were not for the difference in color that helps differentiate them. If it were not for the color of the apps, we would most likely become confused; however, the bright colors help assist short-term memory by creating a connection between color and purpose.

To summarize, designers can do things such as arrange a confusing interface into a more recognizable shape or take advantage of color to create a more memorable design. Next time you're looking the dials of a TV, the screen of your iPhone, or the layout of your tablet or E-Reader, think about what makes you remember what buttons do what, or what makes the interface you're looking at so easy to remember!

Below are some interesting papers on how arrangement and color can affect short-term memory. 

Color and Short-Term Memory Retention

http://homepages.stmartin.edu/fac_staff/molney/website/SMU%20Bio%20Journal/Richman%202006.pdf

Shapes and Short-Term Memory

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18717388

Animal Consciousness and Their Role in Human Life

The level of consciousness of an animal plays a significant part in determining its role in human life. Generally, the more conscious an animal, the more rights it possesses. But how do we define “consciousness?” What determines why we crush roaches under our feet without a second thought, but kicking a dog is punishable by law? Why is animal testing on vertebrates such as dogs, cats and primates largely regulated, while testing on invertebrates such as spiders or worms and has very little regulation?

            In general, we think of “consciousness” as synonymous with “awareness;” if you are aware are responsive to your surroundings, you are conscious. It makes sense that we keep more conscious animals as pets. They can respond to us, let us know their needs, and give us affection. In their own way, they can communicate with us. Dogs will wag their tails when they are happy, cats will hiss if they feel threatened, even guinea pigs emit clicking and squeaking sounds to get attention. They respond to pain – dogs will yelp if kicked, hamsters will squeal if squeezed too hard. We would get very little reward or personal satisfaction out of keeping a roach or a fruit fly for a pet; we can’t tell what they are thinking, we can’t get affection from them, we can’t bond with them like we can with a more alert and sensitive animal such as a cat or dog.

Which makes the better pet?

            However, an animal is not guaranteed a life of care and affection just because it has a high level of consciousness. How does the consciousness of an animal play into animal testing? Some argue that because certain animals, such as primates, are much more conscious and receptive to pain than other animals, it is inhumane to use them for animal testing. Others argue that because these animals are so conscious and aware, it makes them prime candidates for testing: we can view and interpret results much more easily than with bugs or mice. For example, if researchers wanted to test a drug to make sure it didn't cause disorientation in humans, they could much more easily examine the effects of the drug on chimpanzee than they could on a fish or fruit fly. 

        However, just because the level of consciousness of an animal makes it easier to obtain valuable research doesn't mean it is humane to use them for test subjects. Many people are not as concerned with animal testing on mice, flies, or worms because they assume that they are not as conscious of what is happening to them as dog, rabbits or primates. 

Would this ad be as effective if they replaced the cute pug with a naked mole rat? 

         However, can we assume that just because an animal cannot directly express pain, it cannot feel it? Can we think that lobsters are immune to pain just because they don’t scream when we drop it into boiling water? 

         Advances is science may one day be able to tell us just how conscious certain animals are. Below are two links to stories on this topic; in one, Robert Elwood and Barry Magee at Queen’s University in Belfast tested crustacean’s response to electric shocks and found that, when given the choice, the animals generally avoided the testing area where they were shocked; this suggested that they associated that area with pain. In another study, Joseph Garner at Purdue University tested goldfish’s response to intense heat by injecting one group with saline and one group with morphine. Garner found that the fish injected with the painkiller were able to withstand higher amounts of heat, suggesting that the other fish without the painkiller were more aware of the discomfort caused by the heat. In the future, more studies like this may revolutionize the way we think about animal rights and consciousness.

LINKS

http://science.time.com/2013/01/18/do-crabs-feel-pain-maybe-and-maybe-we-should-rethink-eating-them/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090430161242.htm