Dear Ken and Gunnar,
Ken stated:
> Much research goes unused
> because practicing professionals simply don't want to use it.
> They know what they like, they've built a world of professional
> practice in which they are comfortable,
>Gunnar answered:
>I suspect that you are largely right but I am much more aware of the
>world of >design research than most graphic designers and if someone
>asked for specific >examples of important semi-recent research, I'm
>not sure what I'd come up with >as examples.
Let's start with some very recent examples:
- the recent US-Road-signage research:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/magazine/12fonts-t.html?th&emc=th
- the Research by MacDonalds in their search for global symbols:
http://www.translate.com/technology/multilingual_standard/McDonalds_Nutrition_Icons_Case_Study.pdf
- The Research of the UK Department of Health on the "Consultation on
the Introduction of Picture Warnings on Tobacco Packs".
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Consultations/Responsestoconsultations/DH_077960
- The research of Colette Jeffrey for the signage of UK-NHS hospitals.
http://www.nhsidentity.nhs.uk/signage/
- the research of Peter Karow for Adobe InDesign, on which the
paragraph formatting and line-breaks are based.
(Sorry - can't find the reference immediately).
Although I agree that it takes a long time to filter through to
practice, it does not meant that it is not available or not
important. Graphic designers who have to design road-signage,
typographic software, global symbols, cigarette packaging or hospital
signage should consult these.
True, there is a fairly desperate lack of research into 'graphic
design methods' and 'graphic design evaluation', but there are people
working on this too.
Ken:
> In communications design, for example, some simple
> rules of thumb that are based on studies of human physical
> perception and cognitive capacity should guide certain aspects
> of professional practice. Despite this fact, I have often observed
> designers argue about applying these findings to teaching or to
> work, claiming that the research is irrelevant.
Gunnar:
>Again, I don't doubt that you are largely right but I would be
>interested in some specific examples so I can know if I might be one
>of the naysayers.
Medical packaging, information for patients and information for
pharmacists provide ample examples. We know that it is difficult to
remember more than 7 things at the same time (= rule of thumb). Every
box that a pharmacist has to select, the following items need to be
checked:
- name (brand name)
- name (active ingredient)
- manufacturer (brand or generic?)
- pharmaceutical form (tablets or suppositories?)
- strenght (2, 20, 50, 100 mg per dose?)
- number of doses in a box (2, 20, 30, 60 or 100 per box?)
- price
+ the combination of other medicines of the same prescription form
('can they be combined?')
+ general rules about prescriptions ('how likely is it that this
patient actually needs these?' & has this doctor really prescribed
this?)
+ add time pressure (5 people waiting in the pharmacy), tiredness
(nighshifts) and some family problems.
Unfortunately, the rule of thumb is ignored, practice is not studied
nor benchmarked. Designers still design 'creatively' and according to
the 'corporate brand'. The information sequence (= graphic design)
rarely follows the requirements and expectations of pharmacists. Only
through an enormous concentration, high personal involvement and
continuous vigilance is it possible to dispense correct medicines. If
only we could design those boxes according to the rule of thumb ...
Two other rules of thumb: 'we know how pharmacists think' and
'testing is a waste of time.' Result: There is a very serious risk of
confusion with potential lethal consequences.
Is pharmaceutical packaging not interesting for graphic designers?
Then a look at two recent historical studies might be worthwhile:
- "Swiss graphic design.The origins and growth of an international
style." by Richard Hollis. From page 162 onwards, Hollis suggests
that the 'Swiss style' is substantially based on the work of graphic
designers for pharmaceutical industries like Ciba, Geigy, Hoffmann-La
Roche and Sandoz.
- "Active literature. Jan Tschichold and New typography" by
Christopher Burke. This shows some nice examples of work done by
Tschichold for the pharma-industry in its context.
So if you ask me for specific examples of important semi-recent
research than I would quote the medical figures of 'death by
decimal', point to the rules of thumb, show annotated collections of
medical packaging, and show the historical references.
And still, the area is largely ignored by graphic designers. So Ken
is right: "Much research goes unused because practicing professionals
simply don't want to use it."
Don't tell them please: I'm making a fortune ...
Kind regards,
Karel.
[log in to unmask]
