Introduction
The significance of my practice is looking at how design has changed over time to share information and to understand user interaction and experience. The World Wide Web and the designers’ focus has shifted to look closely at these areas in design which are beginning to be seen as key points on how the web is to develop to influence and persuade the user, and in doing so making it a place for all, completely accessible regardless of location and ability.

What is important nowadays when designing for the web? Is it colours, placement, imagery, the user? In this study I shall focus on, debate and analyse the texts, to discuss the answer to such questions, within the key areas of history of graphic design and how its conventions, considerations and goals have adjusted over the years, visual culture and the art of seeing and interpreting, Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and the workings of the mind and visual perception encompassed within Cognitive Psychology focusing on the Gestalt Theory – persuasion, proximity and similarity.

It is the relevance of these theories and how much they stand true when used within the present day environment of the Internet that shall be the focal point of my full Masters study.

History of Design + the Internet
When considering the history of design it becomes clear changes have taken place to accommodate advances in technology. Traditional design was about making the subject matter visually attractive and eye catching. Now, in addition, design on the web is to inform and communicate, and in doing so make the context simple and as understandable as possible.

Hollis (2001) looks right back to the 1970s where Graphic Design was mainly used by business owners, looking for an innovative way for their advertisements to stand out from the crowd. With this decade being extremely important in terms of significant advancements in technology, doors began to open in the world of design, providing new possibilities and opportunities.

As technology advanced the production process became faster and more efficient with the ability to cut and paste at a click of the button as opposed to conventional design when mistakes could cost time and money. The role of the designer diminished as the computer appeared to do it all and Drucker and McVarish (2009) reflect on the artist Sol Lewitt’s bold claim that “…the machine makes the art” (p.325). This caused some concern for designers and the changes taking place constantly met with uncertainty, whilst according to Meggs (1998, p457) “…others embraced it…capable of expanding the scope of design.”

As I look at how design has changed over time, following the influence of technology, and consider how we approach the design of the web to influence and create trust for the user, Drucker and McVarish (2009) have a significant impact on my study by referencing how graphic design has now become more than communication of the image – it is about the positioning and sharing of information as graphic design is now often referred to as information design. It has developed to consider the building of information and user scenarios “…interactivity itself soon became a focus of design, a focus that required attention to user scenarios and behaviors” (p.329). They continue to discuss this further suggesting that the goal for the designer is to break down the interaction process in to bite size parts.

With graphic design being the traditional method of design prior to the Internet, in my own professional experience and those of colleagues web designers often came from a graphic design/print background then moved over to web and digital based work. This allowed for the style to be carried over to the Internet. Was this really working for the digital environment? It would explain the need for this pause and time to understand the theories of interaction to determine if this environment needs to be looked upon differently.

The World Wide Web (WWW) demonstrates how important participation is in postmodern culture where the focus of the piece is on participation, process and experimentation by building familiarity with elements of real life placed within the digital environment. Such examples being the magnifying glass to search, or a folder to store files on, these references build familiarity and aid the interaction of the user, but are adjusted to suit the environment they are placed in. Although technology continues to advance, as Meggs (1998) describes, “…the essence of graphic design remains unchanged.” (p.475). This essence that Meggs discusses suggests that despite the increased need for a focus on user scenarios and behaviour to achieve this the designer simply needs to redefine the concepts in innovative visual ways to accommodate for this new generation of users. For example the bin icon on the computer once emptied cannot be retrieved, or filing a second document of the same name will replace the original, the role of the designer needs to shift to consider the familiar and expectations of the user and interaction on the web differs to that in real life.

Visual Culture.
Everything we see and do is visual; our personal viewpoint, experiences colour our interpretation of what we see, no matter the original intention of the designer. With this in mind and my interpretation of the theories of Mirzoeff (1999, 2002, 2009), Hall (1997) and Drucker (1994, 2004) my understanding is that the visual experience is purely an individual one.

As discussed by Nicholas Mirzoeff (1999, 2002, 2009), visual signs and images are not absolute, it is the meaning, and interpreting and understanding that takes place in society that develop their symbolic function and meaning. What we have grown to know in society and how society has decided what a particular image represents. For example, a red button means OFF or STOP and a green button means ON or START. But surely it is the surroundings that define the button’s meaning…we know the television is off because no picture is showing, no sound is being created and if we were to change the colour or the function we would still know whether it is on or off. Hall (1997) discusses this further in his text. ”Colours do not have any ‘true’ or fixed meanings…Red does not mean ‘Stop’ in nature, anymore than Green means ‘Go’.” (p.26). Therefore my understanding is that the setting of the piece symbolises its meaning and hence influences how the user should interact.

Words, sounds and images are used to express meaning and communicate thoughts to other people, what we must remember is this meaning is known to us because of our previous experience, our social/cultural settings and the environment in which we are raised. My definition of Hall’s (1997) concept is that meaning can never be fixed if culture can change what things mean and how they are interpreted. To understand this difference between cultures we need to include ethical considerations – for example some Asian and Arabic countries read from right to left as opposed to the Western norm of left to right; I propose that this would have an impact on how the user interacts with the user interface. Fig 1.1 and 1.2 show an example of how design considerations completely change when in a different culture. Figure 1.2 shows how the Arabic BBC news website is a complete mirror image of the UK one in Figure 1.1. The logo sits on the right and the search on the left for Arabic news, taking into account the direction of reading.

(Left) Figure 1.1. BBC News UK
(Right) Figure 1.2. BBC News Arabic

This brings in the theory of sequence as discussed by Drucker (1994, 2004) as a way to present information. She explains that, “…sequence is designed as a system of order rather than to promote linear movement – sequence participates in the distribution of elements into an organized systems where location helps provide access.” (p.258). This method is key to my thinking and practice as an approach to influence and engage the user through a predefined route to a desired goal.

In society we have control of meanings and interpretation and we can collectively create new signs, new meanings by representation, Hall (1997, p23-24) explains, ”…we can all ‘agree’ to allow words to carry somewhat different meanings…” Words and terminology are constantly being added to the Oxford English Dictionary and many of these are from the influence of technology advancements. To illustrate this, recent additions to the Oxford Dictionaries Online (2013) show how technology truly is setting the pace in how we communicate in todays generation with words such as, “…gossip mill, friend zone, tweetable, and social sharing…touchless all included.” It is we in society who decides on these terms through the meaning and interpretation we exchange with each other.

As visual culture highlights, we can essentially influence the meaning of something by the way designers design and present it. This would imply that with the representation of an object in a familiar setting whereby there is some pre-existing meaning we could adapt it to change the conditioning we have had from society that we have grown up in. This would justify that the action of pressing a button and then transitioning to a swipe action, when placed in the right setting can be a smooth and successful process creating a whole new meaning and sign.

Combined Cognitive Psychology and User Experience Studies
When considering the influence of design with regards to the user behaviour I shall look at theories within cognitive psychology to understand human behaviour and visual perception as a basis for my studies of behaviours on the web. The Gestalt Theory, detailed later, focuses on the representation of objects and how this can influence the on looker.

As Davis (2005) explains, “we don’t just sit in a corner mentally processing things without reference to the effects of social, emotional and organizational context,” (p.2) hence why HCI is such a focus in present times for computer scientists, psychologists and designers. She continues interestingly, to highlight that when a computer responds to our requests, requirements and searches it forms a resemblance to real human-like intelligence, which impresses us and increases our trust in the device.

“Studies have shown that low self-efficiency for computing activity predicts people’s avoidance of it, and performance when doing it, more strongly than gender, age, training, or even expectations of whether it’ll work,” (p.30) identifies Davis (2005).

Gleitman, Rozin and Sabini (1997) note that Solomon Asch was an influential American Psychologist (1907-1996) who was known for his focus on order and understanding not from the situation but from how it is noticed through conformity and persuasion, which has great relevance in todays’ world with reviews having great influence on peoples’ actions and opinions on the web. They continue to discuss Asch’s study to show that “…people are ultimately independent” (p.984). In fact he found the opposite and found given a series of lines and a set of participants who gave wrong answers still there remained to be a significant amount of conforming – in fact the majority conformed to the wrong answer despite knowing it was incorrect.

Following on from the Gleitman et al studies of Asch I analyse this to suggest that the influence of the majority would have a key impact in the decisions people make. In light of this I would be interested in using this within my practice as reviews of products becoming a leading form of persuasion and influence on the web, therefore testing if popularity ratings can govern the decisions made.

As we begin to understand HCI in more depth, the psychology of the Internet can be often overlooked because as Davies (2005) explains, psychologists begin to question if we can truly predict how people will interact with the web when “…each individual is assumed to be governed by a completely unique internal ‘world’.” (p. 44).

This idea features heavily in the work of Susan M Weinschenk (2011), a key psychologist who focuses her practice on the design of technology. It is here I question the authenticity of her findings as she heavily references past experiments to understand human behaviour on the web yet these without them being in the context which she discusses. She investigates the Kanizsa rectangle within the Gestalt movement, shown in figure 1.3, in relation to how the brain creates shortcuts of what it sees. This led to her idea that designers can “…influence what people see or think they see by the shapes and colors.” (p. 2). A similar theory is that known as the Framing Effect discussed by Bradley (2010) in the context of how this concept can influence the user. The belief is that frames, or borders, draw in and contain the onlooker and lead them down a predefined route (Figure 1.4), very much like the Kanizsas Rectangle as discussed by Weinschenk (2011).

Figure 1.3. Example of Kanizsa Rectangle

Figure 1.4. The Framing Effect

Weinschenk (2011) and Gordan (1989) discuss the area of proximity, similarity and grouping within the area of the Gestalt theory. They believed in the relationship between the world and everyday experience, something featured heavily in the design of the web today and a focus for my study.

As with Asch’s area of conformity, Gestalt theorists investigated conditioning as mentioned by Ian E Gordan (1989), ”…when a chicken was trained to peck at the darker of two greys and this is now paired with an even darker grey, it is to the latter the animal now responds – suggesting that the original learning involved a relationship rather than an absolute stimuli.” Investigations also took place with monkeys, showing that “monkeys solving problems which are more related to their natural lives than the laboratory…do not engage in constant trial and error, but show periods of inactivity followed by sudden solutions of the problems.” (p.57).

If this were true for animal behaviour then it would be reasonable to think that humans react in similar ways. This would suggest that over time we become conditioned to know how to respond. As technology advances and how we interact with it changes we can hardly recollect the shift as we have adjusted with ease from pressing buttons to swiping to achieve the desired goal. But having discussed visual culture earlier to what extent is this true? Weinschenk (2011) continues to discuss the concept of “…red means ‘in the red’ or financial trouble, or it could mean danger or stop. Green means money or ‘go’.” (p.27). She suggests choosing colours carefully with these meanings in mind, contradicting the views of Hall (1997) who believed that colours have no predetermined meaning. In light of this it would be fair to also consider the context as this dictates the meaning as well as the arrangement, organization when designing.

Conclusion
Potential gains can be realised by understanding the methodologies mentioned above however examining cognitive psychology suggests the experimental timeframe and the time the Internet existed are vastly different. Many professionals are beginning to look towards understanding human behaviour within the digital world, yet in looking forward we have been looking back without taking it and applying it to modern theories to see if it still stands true. HCI has the potential to play a significant role in contributing to the advancement of the web. It is important to understand the needs and filter out the areas we currently become fixated on without solid evidence as to its authenticity.

This investigation has asked if we should be treating the design of the web differently and if so how we can design it to influence and build trust for the audience who use it.

Although I believe HCI for computers is largely misunderstood at present it would be unfair for me to be sure on this statement without proof to justify such claims. This therefore opens up the practice I am undertaking to better understand what people are drawn to in the digital environment pushing forward the innovation of the future of web design.

As discussed within this essay, the experiences people receive are largely unique and to that individual. This would suggest that it is very hard to draw a perfect design that captures everyone’s’ needs from their visit to the web, however focusing on persuasion and influence could lead to significant conformity in actions the user takes. Although there are clear absences in the methodologies mentioned above, the study has revealed insight in to the development of user interaction and theories to be applied to move forward.
 

List of References:

Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web-design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/

Davis, C. (2005). Finding and Knowing. Psychology, Information and Computers. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Drucker, J. (1994, 2004). The Book as Sequence: Narrative and Non-Narrative. The Century of Artists’ Books. New York, NY: Granary Books.

Drucker, J., & McVarnish, E. (2009). Digital design after the 1970s. Graphic Design History. A Critical Guide (pp. 323-339). United States of America: Pearson Education.

Gleitman, H., Rozin, P., & Sabini, J. (1997). Solomon E. Asch (1907–1996): Obituary, 52(9), pp. 984-985.

Gordan, I. E. (1989). Theories of Visual Perception. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hall, S. (1997). Chapter 1. Representation, meaning and language. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp.15-29). London, United Kingdom: SAGE/Open University.

Hollis, R. (2001). Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.186-223). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Meggs, P. (1998). The Digital Revolution. A History of Graphic Design (pp. 455-475). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2002). The Visual Culture Reader. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2009). An Introduction to Visual Culture. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Oxford Dictionaries. What’s new? (February 2013). Retrieved from http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/what-s-new

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001) The Internet: global village or multinational corporate marketplace? Practices of Looking. An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press Ltd.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
 

List of Images:
Figure 1.1. BBC News – UK. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
Figure 1.2. BBC News – Arabic. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/arabic/
Figure 1.3. Example of a Kanizsa rectangle: Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Figure 1.4. The Framing Effect. Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web-design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/
 

Bibliography:

Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web- design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/

Behrens, R. R. (1998). Art, Design and Gestalt Theory. Leonardo 31(4), 299-303

Bonnici, P. (1999). Visual Language. The Hidden Medium of Communication. Switzerland: RotoVision SA.

Davis, C. (2005). Finding and Knowing. Psychology, Information and Computers. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Drucker, J. (1994, 2004). The Book as Sequence: Narrative and Non-Narrative. The Century of Artists’ Books. New York, NY: Granary Books.

Drucker, J., & McVarnish, E. (2009). Digital design after the 1970s. Graphic Design History. A Critical Guide (pp. 323-339). United States of America: Pearson Education.

Gleitman, H., Rozin, P., & Sabini, J. (1997). Solomon E. Asch (1907–1996): Obituary, 52(9), pp. 984-985.

Gordan, I. E. (1989). Theories of Visual Perception. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hall, S. (1997). Chapter 1. Representation, meaning and language. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp.15-29). London, United Kingdom: SAGE/Open University.

Hollis, R. (2001). Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.186-223). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the Psychology of Internet Behaviour. Virtual Worlds, Real Lives. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Krugg, S. (2006). Don’t Make Me Think! A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, Second Edition. United States of America: New Riders.

Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., & Brown, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), pp. 115-126.

McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding Comics. The Invisible Art by Scott McCloud. United States of America: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Meggs, P. (1998). The Digital Revolution. A History of Graphic Design (pp. 455-475). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2002). The Visual Culture Reader. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2009). An Introduction to Visual Culture. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing Interactions. United States of America: MIT Press.

Oh, H., & Price, J. (2012). How do storefront window displays influence entering decisions of clothing stores? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19(1), pp. 27-35.

Oxford Dictionaries. What’s new? (February 2013). Retrieved from http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/what-s-new

Rock, I. (1990). The Legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in Cognition and Social Psychology. Hillsdale NJ: Psychology Press.

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001) The Internet: global village or multinational corporate marketplace? Practices of Looking. An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press Ltd.

Wallace, P. (1999). The Psychology of the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Like myself majority of web designers have come from a graphic design background, after all the world wide web really isn’t that old.

On my research in this particular area I was presented with a wealth of books looking at the history of Graphic Design. I really did underestimate its history and it made for a fascinating find.

Ayiter (n.d) stated in his blog about The History of Visual Communication, like myself “…come from a graphic artist background in print, where the artist has the absolute control over the size and dimensions of all aspects of design.” He continues to compare this to the creation of the web and being restricted to the size of the browser window and making the components work within that restricted space. This in my opinion is the overarching change within design and surely this then means the treatment has to be different?

Throughout my research in every book I look at that covers the history of graphic design and development of the internet, that the sole purpose of the Internet was not for the visual but was only to share information, communication, like an electronic library. It in fact started out as a Sturken and Cartwright (2001) “…military defense system… So that alone shows that communication has changed.

Graphic design and the form it use to take…
Graphic design has gone from being something produced using specialists who focused on page layout, typesetters and production artists who placed the pieces together in the areas. Now its all done by one person on one single computer. Type and image processing had remained seperated and never working the two together…one just simply lay over the top of the other, one after the other! Now you can work with images and type together, mixing and matching and integrating where you wish. This has given the designer much more scope in what they can do but has it caused limitation on the other hand? Drucker and Mcvarish observed, “Many designers who created fabulous imagery on screen were disappointed to find that the electronic aesthetics was not always matched in print.” But now you are able to cut, copy, paste, merge, flatten, inverted, reversed, brightened, darkened, distort, at a moments click of buttons…editing became so easy! Editing the colours, textures can be changed frequently til the desired effect has been reached.

Its purpose…
The purpose and aim of design has changed hugely. Digital design in its infancy meant manipulating images, and with typefaces on the canvas of the that computer. The dot-com boom in the late 1990s really brought the World Wide Web to the surface and the internet truly became visual and audiable. Its now very much moved over to focus on the user and how they interact with the web and learning this can optimise how the web is created to optimise the experience the person gets. Ayiter (n.d), “Unlike traditional design where the goal is to make the object or application physically attractive, the goal of user interface design is to make the user interaction experience as simple and intuitive as possible.”

Drucker and McVarish (2009) explains how digital technology brought more than a change in design styles, “Graphic design now involves structuring environments for use rather than simply creating effective displays. Responsibility for shaping information has profound implications for the role of design…” We therefore need to think more of graphics and now beyond communication as it now moves in to also looking at the structuring of information. So despite the internets main sole purpose continuously changing and developing from its birth it still remains that in the terms of the world wide web design isn’t just the visual its about the delivering of information and that will always be what it does, whether that’s sharing information about products a web site sells, or on sharing photographs its all sharing and using information. However we mustn’t lose sight of graphic design has always been advertising but the canvas has changed considerably.

How the Internet is changing…
As when graphic design first came about on computers there was limitations on default fonts and colour palettes. Truw to the process of development the Internet is faced initially with the same constraints…limited web fonts, limited file sizes. This brought about some concern, Meggs (1998) “Early in the Internet Revolution, many feared a collapse of design standards due to the limitations.” But as shown earlier this hasn’t been the case its become more information design and how to communicate the information in an accessible way.

The role of the sciences…
To support my studies Drucker and McVarish (2009) explain further in their book, “the once innovative concept of a ‘language of form’ is now being reconfigured through cognitive studies and advance systems theory, aided by new strains of psychology, cultural theory, and social analysis.” The elements being designed for the web are now having to be understood behaviourally and then applied in to graphics and typefaces.

How the internet is viewed by others…
With the development of digital design being so ‘quick’ the development has become a mystery. It has made it seem that the work of the digital or information designer is easy and that the computer does it. It has really opened itself to many critics. This new form of communication has given everyone so many opportunities be it companies or individuals the possibilities are ever growing, they’re endless. However this source of communication has its down fulls, it is produced so fast and so widely its controls are left scrutinised opening itself to global markets whether that’s good communication or bad. Sturken and Cartwright (2001) state that “lines of communication are multidirectional…and globally.” And there is is the Information Superhighway!

Questions, the pitfulls, only the user can decide…
As Meggs (1998) points out that with this advancement of technology elements have been lost, “The photograph lost its status on an undisputed documentation of visual reality because imaging software allows seamless and undetectable image manipulation.”

To conclude…
Meggs sums it up nicely, “a process of redefining the nature of communication, work, authorship and graphic design is underway. Graphic design is expanding and changing. Professional designers are now joined by laypeople whose design activities are extensions of their vocational or avocational activities, while graphic designers are extending their medium into self-initiated and fine arts-related experimentation.” And that is exactly what I am aiming to do. Investigating the areas of ‘fuzziness’ being overlooked in a fast-paced ever evolving world. He continues to state that the tools of graphic design are continuously changing but the role of graphic design remains the same and that is to communicate information in some form or another, internet or no internet!

As part of my MA I am here to, “adapt new technology…by inventing new forms and new ways of expressing ideas.” And with this I want to investigate user interaction and experience to understand this area better to developer as a designer and design with the key areas, and new findings in mind.

List of References:

Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web-design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/

Davis, C. (2005). Finding and Knowing. Psychology, Information and Computers. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Drucker, J. (1994, 2004). The Book as Sequence: Narrative and Non-Narrative. The Century of Artists’ Books. New York, NY: Granary Books.

Drucker, J., & McVarnish, E. (2009). Digital design after the 1970s. Graphic Design History. A Critical Guide (pp. 323-339). United States of America: Pearson Education.

Gleitman, H., Rozin, P., & Sabini, J. (1997). Solomon E. Asch (1907–1996): Obituary, 52(9), pp. 984-985.

Gordan, I. E. (1989). Theories of Visual Perception. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hall, S. (1997). Chapter 1. Representation, meaning and language. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp.15-29). London, United Kingdom: SAGE/Open University.

Hollis, R. (2001). Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.186-223). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Meggs, P. (1998). The Digital Revolution. A History of Graphic Design (pp. 455-475). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2002). The Visual Culture Reader. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2009). An Introduction to Visual Culture. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Oxford Dictionaries. What’s new? (February 2013). Retrieved from http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/what-s-new

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001) The Internet: global village or multinational corporate marketplace? Practices of Looking. An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press Ltd.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
 

Bibliography:

Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web- design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/

Behrens, R. R. (1998). Art, Design and Gestalt Theory. Leonardo 31(4), 299-303

Bonnici, P. (1999). Visual Language. The Hidden Medium of Communication. Switzerland: RotoVision SA.

Davis, C. (2005). Finding and Knowing. Psychology, Information and Computers. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Drucker, J. (1994, 2004). The Book as Sequence: Narrative and Non-Narrative. The Century of Artists’ Books. New York, NY: Granary Books.

Drucker, J., & McVarnish, E. (2009). Digital design after the 1970s. Graphic Design History. A Critical Guide (pp. 323-339). United States of America: Pearson Education.

Gleitman, H., Rozin, P., & Sabini, J. (1997). Solomon E. Asch (1907–1996): Obituary, 52(9), pp. 984-985.

Gordan, I. E. (1989). Theories of Visual Perception. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hall, S. (1997). Chapter 1. Representation, meaning and language. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp.15-29). London, United Kingdom: SAGE/Open University.

Hollis, R. (2001). Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.186-223). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the Psychology of Internet Behaviour. Virtual Worlds, Real Lives. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Krugg, S. (2006). Don’t Make Me Think! A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, Second Edition. United States of America: New Riders.

Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., & Brown, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), pp. 115-126.

McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding Comics. The Invisible Art by Scott McCloud. United States of America: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Meggs, P. (1998). The Digital Revolution. A History of Graphic Design (pp. 455-475). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2002). The Visual Culture Reader. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2009). An Introduction to Visual Culture. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing Interactions. United States of America: MIT Press.

Oh, H., & Price, J. (2012). How do storefront window displays influence entering decisions of clothing stores? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19(1), pp. 27-35.

Oxford Dictionaries. What’s new? (February 2013). Retrieved from http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/what-s-new

Rock, I. (1990). The Legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in Cognition and Social Psychology. Hillsdale NJ: Psychology Press.

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001) The Internet: global village or multinational corporate marketplace? Practices of Looking. An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press Ltd.

Wallace, P. (1999). The Psychology of the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

In my practice I am interested in answering how the design of the web can influence and create trust for the audience who use it. There are many resources on user experience and accessibility however I have found there to be no in depth research in to the user within the digital environment. Many refer to past cognitive/behavioural experiments conducted many years prior to the existence of the web. I want to investigate in more detail the design of the web, to get more specific research on how to influence and create trust by the way we design in the digital era. I am interested in understanding how images, words, sounds, video and others alike, are key to the user as they interact with the computer.

To successfully achieve and understand this I shall carry out research into the areas of history of graphic design and how communication has changed following the creation of the Internet. I will also investigate visual culture and the practises of seeing, looking and interpreting. In order to support this I will consider the discipline of cognitive psychology and how peoples’ minds work when presented with images, words and other visual elements for influence and persuasion.

I think it is key to understand how graphic design has shifted through the years to draw upon the changes that have happened within design and communication and ask the question should we be treating the design for the web differently than traditional design? If so, how and why?

Investigating the history of design will allow a better understanding of how the advancement of design has opened up new visual possibilities. The digital era has now meant faster production of pieces of work, with the opportunity to cut, copy, paste, delete at a press or click of a button as opposed to traditional methods, whereby changes could potentially involved reproducing the piece again from scratch. Like me many web designers come from a graphic design/print background, where working on a canvas of varying sizes allows a greater scope for creativity. At present the web designer is now faced with many limitations such as the browser window size and limited fonts. Designers of the digital era have to work within the confines of what is provided within the menu and the palette supplied by the program. But we must not forget print designers too have constraints to work within such as the printer rollers and grippers. This shows that limitations have always existed. Design is not just about the canvas. It is how, as designers, we use the tools we have and the importance of understanding the mind of the onlooker to communicate successfully.

J Drucker and E McVarish (2009) suggest that, graphic design “…initially meant manipulating type, vector graphics, and pixel-based images in the display space of an application. But interactivity itself soon became a focus of design, a focus that required attention to user scenarios and behaviours.” (p.329). This observation by Drucker and McVarish has influenced my research greatly; this has become a key text in my investigation.

Traditionally graphic design was about making the subject matter visually attractive, eye catching, head turning. The original intention of the Internet was to communicate information. It was never intended for visual purposes but this soon changed. Design has now become more than communication of the image it is about the positioning and sharing of information. Graphic design is now referred to as information design, the passing on of messages through use of visual elements. Many researcher including J Drucker and E McVarnish (2009) and also R Hollis (1994) discuss this change, as we rely more on images to communicate with one another.

Communication used to be about the object and its location, for example the television. At least one sits in every home, and it communicates messages to us however we cannot do so back. Since the boom of the World Wide Web communication is now multidirectional such as by email, websites, instant messaging, video calling and many more. By this we communicate and interact with each other as discussed by M Sturken and L Cartwright (2001). It has become a global form of transferring information from one to another no matter the location or time.

By understanding this area I hope it shall give me a better insight to know how to position, design and present things, to communicate to the best and therefore influencing the audience resulting in the desired outcome from the design. The question I want to answer is should we be thinking of the Internet and treating it as a different visual space?

Nicholas Mirzoeff (1999, 2000, 2002, 2009) is a key voice within visual culture and I am interested in pursuing his texts in more detail. He writes about creating meaning with the visual and how we in society create meanings by interpreting what we see. I intend to research and understand his practice further and apply similar theories to my practice. I am interested in understanding how presenting something in a particular way creates the meaning/purpose however what would happen if you took that away? Or that particular way changed and was presented in a different environment…does the meaning remain? By doing this I shall become aware of what it is that humans engage more with, and what it takes to influences the audience. Mirzoeff continues to explore that with the creation of the computer the visual possibilities are far greater.

On my initial search it has become clear that there are many texts relating to user experience and interactivity comparing experiments conducted as early as 1955 far before the Internet appeared. Susan M. Weinschenk (2009, 2011) a well-known psychologist focuses her practice on the design of technology. She refers to how the user best interacts and navigates the website in relation to past cognitive/behavioural experiments from other famous psychologists that have been done many years ago. The problem is that these theories are not true to the area they are trying to investigate. The research and experiments they discuss have been conducted outside of the digital realm, so is it possible to support their claims when it is used in such a different environment? I will investigate similar other experiments conducted by key psychologists for example Solomon Asch (1990, 1997) and conformity, and the Gestalt Theory also investigated by Weinschenk. Would the results change when taken in to the design of interactivity of the web?
Links to my Practice

To pull together my practice I shall be looking at techniques including sequential art as researched by S McCloud (1993). He discusses sequential art in the form of comics and how pictorial and other images placed in a thought out sequence can share information and in addition produce a response from the viewer. I would like to take this theory and explore it within my practice and I believe this will enable me to create similar sequences, to ensure there is a route and flow, and encourage a response from the viewer who interacts with it. J Drucker (1994, 2004) also discusses sequential form in relation to the book as a sequence and discusses how “…sequence participates in the distribution of elements into an organized system where location helps to provide access.” She continues to look at the movement of left to right and how this “…can be relied upon unless there are instructions (or obstructions) which disrupt the readers’ expectations.” This shall be a good resource for further investigation within my practice, on the impact of the positioning and placement of elements on the canvas that is the web page and how this has an effect on the user.

I would like to investigate further the opportunities drawn upon in my research of the change of graphic design and if this could have an impact on how the user interacts. To highlight as an example, M Sturken and L Cartwright (2001) discuss in their texts how there are many forms of communication appearing in recent years. I would like to investigate if these various form of communications such as images, words, audio, video and so on, have different influences on the user and their trust?

My aim within all these key areas is to draw upon history not only within graphic design but also in visual culture and cognitive psychology. I shall continue to research and draw upon the information, investigation and evidential work being done today within the digital environment but still drawing upon the theories of human behaviour in everyday environments and seeing if this still stands true when placed in to interactivity of the web. With this detailed research, I hope to pull together enough supporting knowledge and evidence, gained from my own practice, to confidently answer if the design of the web can influence and create trust for the audience who use it and if the way we design it should be different to that of traditional, conventional design.
 

Literature Search Bibliography

Behrens, R. R. (1998). Art, Design and Gestalt Theory. Leonardo 31(4), 299-303

Bradley, S. (2010). The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context. Retrieved from http://www.vanseodesign.com/web-design/framing-expectation-exposure-effect/

Drucker, J. (1994, 2004). The Book as Sequence: Narrative and Non-Narrative. The Century of Artists’ Books. New York, NY: Granary Books.

Drucker, J., & McVarnish, E. (2009). Digital design after the 1970s. Graphic Design History. A Critical Guide (pp. 323-339). United States of America: Pearson Education

Gleitman, H., Rozin, P., & Sabini, J. (1997). Solomon E. Asch (1907–1996): Obituary, 52(9), 984-985.

Hollis, R. (2001). From 1990 to the New Millennium. After Modernism: The End of Design? Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.216-223). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Hollis, R. (2001). The 1970s and 1980s. New Waves: Electronic Technology. Graphic Design. A Concise History. (pp.186-215). London, UK: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the Psychology of Internet Behaviour. Virtual Worlds, Real Lives. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan

Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., & Brown, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), 115-126.

McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding Comics. The Invisible Art by Scott McCloud. United States of America: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Meggs, P. (1998). The Digital Revolution. A History of Graphic Design (pp. 455-475). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2002). The Visual Culture Reader. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mirzoeff, N. (2009). An Introduction to Visual Culture. (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Oh, H., & Price, J. (2012). How do storefront window displays influence entering decisions of clothing stores? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19(1), 27-35.

Rock, I. (1990). The Legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in Cognition and Social Psychology. Hillsdale NJ: Psychology Press.

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2001) The Internet: global village or multinational corporate marketplace? Practices of Looking. An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press Ltd.

Wallace, P. (1999). The Psychology of the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

To understand how I approached my research I have begun by showing how and where it all began. The many questions I had my time in the industry, and to compliment this slide one that shows examples of websites I have worked on…to highlight the areas of debate and discussions.

• Who uses the internet/web?
• Can one image depicted in various ways evoke different emotions/views
• Can I influence peoples decisions/predict peoples
• Responses/emotions/thoughts/actions?
• How influential is the web?

Many areas of interest and research for me are copying, facial recognition, influence, illusory contours, trust, security, and so on and so forth.

An interesting statement I found which really sums up what I am wanting to look at is, “When you break it down, web design is simply the manipulation of content and images on a website to appeal to the perceptions of a target audience.”

The following slide shows examples of websites I have worked on all of which at some point many questions arise which we really do not know the actual answers are but we just do what we ‘think’ is right.

• Do you need borders round each asset (box)?
• Where is the most important area of a web page?
• Does the button need to be green?
• To the left or right, at the top or the bottom?
• Do buttons need arrows?

This brought me to the following slide which shows the question. How can the design/aspects of design of the web influence and create trust for the audience who use it?

To help me conduct my research I then broke down the question in to areas to study:

• Understand who uses the web and what for?
• Understand cognitive psychology and how this can relate to the use of the internet

One of the quotes from Clare Davies in Finding and Knowing, that I found whilst doing my research which really sums up what I want to research is, “Every basic psychology textbook has reported these findings for over 25 years, but we largely overlook the implications for our increasingly media-controlled social attitudes.” This is exactly the reasons why I want to look at this area.

So from this I begin the search.

The following slide shows the statistics of the internet. Nothing here is of a great surprise really, its to be expected that the greated use is between 16-25 years and the less being of those 75 years plus. One fact that was of interest and plays a significant factor in the trust element of my topic is:

“One in five Internet users said that their current Internet or computer skills were not sufficient to protect their personal data”

One of the very first readings I did on starting the course I found really had many key elements relevant to my practise. Here I have highlighted this reading:

Mirzoeff, N. (1999) Introduction. What is visual culture? An Introduction to Visual Culture (pp 1 – 9). Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge.

The element in this reading is the part discussing Vision and Visuality, what we see and what we are allowed to see by how things are presented to us causing up to form an opinion. How something is presented creates that meaning and this is true in some many things in life and very much so to how websites are designed.

The next slide is the person who at present I would say is certainly a key psychologist for the work I am looking at. Susan Weinschenk is a leading psychology who specialises in the psychology of technology. One of her key books is:

Weinschenk, S. M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. California, United States of America:
Pearson Education

She looks very closely at the elements highlighted in the first slide drawing on the cognitive psychology and applying past experiments to the internet trying to understand how the audience think. She also looks at a theory known as Gestalt Psychology, the use of illusory contours and how this is applied to the design of the web.

The above slide are just a selection of the experiements she highlights in her books.

Gestalt Psychology and the Kanizsa Triangle which creates illusions and shows how your brains completes missing areas create, as in this example, a shape that isn’t there.

STOP WAR STOP PEACE
This example shows how slight changes of how text is laid out and position can create completely different messages.

The image showing a lady looking up to a product indicates how facial recognition and eye tracking can playing a key part to leading you round a website which even thinking about it.

And the panel of faces which all sorts of expressions is a experiment from Paul Ekman looking at how people respond and recognition expressions and how this can evoke emotions and opinions to the on looker.

The following slide are a couple of journals. One looking at Influences of online store perception, shopping enjoyment, and shopping involvement on consumer patronage behavior and the other How do storefront window displays influence entering decisions of clothing stores. Both these readings are of great insight, and the one to highlight is the attention of the store windows. A lot of time website pages are seen as store windows as the impression gained here is what determines if the person pays a visit to your website/store. These are arguably the most important aspects of the site…the length of time you have to get hold of the onlooker however differs somewhat to the landing page of a site which is of significant less than that of a shop window whereby you may have a bit longer.

Here there is a clear reference again to the Gestalt Psychology, understanding that a lot of it is to do with balance/proximity, continuation and the focal point. And this is stretch across from store window to online. Each need to take the visual stimuli in to account looking at colour, shapes, sizes and so on and so forth.

This book above, Davies, C. (2005). Finding and Knowing. Psychology, Information and Computers. London, United Kingdom: Routledge by Clare Davies, has some great pointers more focused on impressions online and how this is usually formed non-verbally online. Davies states, “The home page is more like a billboard on an ad or in the yellow pages.
It’s an inexpensive way to create an impression…” And with the journal reading in mind, online we have the attention of the onlooker for only a short period of time. So its how can we make that impression and hence impact strong to entice them to stay for longer!?

Looking more closely to the cognitive theories that interest me I am drawn to the Gestalt Theory.

This theory has been mentioned in a few of my readings and it seems this is a solid practise used in the design, and decisions of the web. Its key for looking at its Law of Proximity and Similarity. This can guide such things as placement of buttons…or other important elements.

Another key area highlight right at the start of the MA when reading about Vision and Visuality. This is The Framing Effect.

The Framing Effect is a study founded by two psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahnman (1981). They look in to how people react differently to a particular choice depending whether it is presented as a loss or a gain. They further looked at how the framing effect can affect the outcome choices we make.

The the last two slides highlights the keys areas at present. However as my research has continued I have been aware of areas of additional research that I want to highlight but not draw on to long. I wish to take it and box it for the mean time, with a wish to draw on it at a later stage when I am gathering my findings of all these elements of the web.

The further research focuses on conformity.

Conformity is huge in the world of the internet. Solomon Asch is a wellknown psychologist who has done a test whereby a control is presented as an answer, the wrong answer to a selection of lines. He wants to see here how many people will conform with this control even if they think another is the right answer. This is true to today with the fast growing awareness of reviews, be it on products or books, there is a clear uptake on interest if the review is really good…and this is simply represented by a 5 star scoring system, with little to no interest being shown if reviews are poor.

Language and communcation is massive to get across a message in a certain way to the audience of that site. Despite being restricted to the QWERTY keyboard to communicate many new ways are being founded all the time with the use of caplock for SHOUTING and the use of emoticons to express oneself emotion to the person you intend Then there is the abbreviation for the busy people in us BRB!

Even the simple layout of text can create a completely different message.

And then lasting is Affective Computing. This is a study and development of devices that recognise and simulate human emotion such as emotional speech, facial expressions and body gesture. This I touched upon earlier and am interested to know if how a person is standing and if they are smiling or sad and so on, actually has an impact on your movements on the web.

——

Having presented this I feel this area has gone well and is a section of something that is a lot bigger. As highlighted to me what I need to do is look at what people are not considering, where there may be a gap and show what people are not considering. I have gather the information for cognitive psychology but now I need to look at how the internet may, or may not changed communication.

Do we treat the internet differently when in fact should it be viewed the same? Afterall the internet was never intended for visual purposes and merely as a resource of information/library. Is an advertisement in a magazine for example any different to an image online and how you look at it any different?

I need to look at the development of the internet and communication. Gaining a deeper understanding of how we interpret the internet.

Who decides what we see and how we still have the same visuals regardless…do we see it differently? Are the theories of the past being forgotten and swamped by the internet and to so called, new way of thinking?

In the research I have done do they take a look at imagery and how the imagery alone can engage someone? Or is it all based on cognitive psychology? Without considering the image that sits before us?

I have this wealth of information on cognitive psychology. Now I need to see if these people take in to account the power of the image alone, ignoring all the details of the buttons and placement and focus on the engagement of the image.

Actions following this:

Research…

Having worked in the digital industry for over 6 years I am keen to understand the structure of the web more…learn to think before I design!

The habit we all get in to when designing for the web is looking at what others are doing, cause surely ‘if they are doing it that way it must be right’. I can’t tell you enough how much I have heard that line before. We design things this certain way because of the preconceived rules we have be lead to be believe is true. We think buttons should be green because that means go!

An interesting read we had in our first 2 weeks, The Work of Representation Chapter 1. Here in 1.3 Sharing the codes, it talks about traffic light. It concludes that it is us who fix the meaning not the colour, not the work, not the language not the object it is constructed by the meaning. You take away the colours or change the colours to pink, black and brown, the traffic light will still have meaning be it down to the sequence these colours appear in…we will still know what to do. Meaning depends on the relationship between things in the world – the people, object and events in which it appears be it real or fictional…these together allow us to construct its meaning. Take one away and still the meaning is there.

As we continue in our readings we approach on how technology has made it so that when we see an image this is not telling us anything about it and what was there. This is merely someones representation. It has been staged and framed by the person who sits behind the image who is trying to convey a specific meaning to us the viewer. However we find ourselves trying to find meaning and interpret what sits before us when in fact there is much more going on outside the frame that has been presented to us. This swiftly led me to find the psychology test called The Framing Effect by by psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman (1981). This is framing (displaying) certain elements to encourage a desired reaction/solution. This finding led me to a lot of resource with regards to this context and how this effect can be used to influence your audience.

One specific being from Vanseo Design,
The Framing Effect: Influence Your Audience By Setting The Context.

As we continue to research this area it becomes clear that in everything in everyday life we are having things framed to us…presented in a way to forced a particular reaction/opinion. It is only as we look around ourselves at the world first hand that we see what we want to see. Everything presented to us on television, internet, photographs is a simple representation that someone has chosen to show in particular. And with that we form our thoughts, emotions, opinions to make our conclusions and decisions about the subject. A very clever way to manipulative people in their actions and feelings.

Images are framed and this can be down to its colour/tone, the setting in which is laid, the wording to accompany the image. But as stated in Researching Visual Materials by Gillian Rose, not everyone will respond/see how the intended wanted them to. And to finish this part of a fantastic statement made by Christoper Pinney (2004: 8) the most important question is ‘not how images “look”, but what they can “do”. And this is exactly the area of importance for me.

I have continued on with my research and put my focus in to understanding the psychology of the internet/web ready to explore my area of interest.

The Psychology of the Internet by Patricia Wallace

Can how much we feel trust for a website influence how we react? As founded in “…personalised services from book recommendations to online portfolio analysis. Then we wonder what we gave up, in terms of privacy and to control to obtain them”. In summary when we post comments, give over own personal information to gain information back for ourselves, what is it that ensures we trust the site? We send this information over but with little to no knowledge of what happens with that information. Do we do it because others have? Are we influenced by conformity?

Your Online Persona. Warm and Cold Impressions
‘Warm and cold say a great deal about our dispositions and influence’
‘The cues people use to form some impression of your warmth are mainly non verbal. Your facial expressions can be a giveaway…’
‘In many corners of the Internet, your typed words take centre stage’
We now find ourselves expressing our emotions by the use of emoticons ‘…to add warmth to online communication’

The Psychology of the Internet book continues to mention that the homepage of any website is key and considers it as a ‘billboard or an ad in the yellow pages’ It declares it is here that you can create your first impression.

How can an impression be made through visuals on the web? Can peoples faces create an impression, a reaction? Can language be used to re-inforce what the image is trying to convey? Is image stronger that text?

Lasting one of the key readings I have found is by a wellknown Pschologist particularly for applying her practice to the design of techbology is Susan M. Weinschenk. She has many books published on this subject matter but one personal favourites of mine is, 100 Things Every Designer Needs To Know About People.

This makes for a fascinating read however a key criticism being that her main focus throughout is from the basis of other psychologists experiments and drawing conclusions from this and applying, and presuming, it would be the same for the web without any solid evidence to support it which have been tested within the digital stage.

Be this a bug bear her work does provide me a strong basis for some interesting research to how this can be applied to the web. Some snippets of interesting research follows:

Larson and Loschky Research

Additional research done by Dimitri Bayle (2009) shows that by placing objects within the peripheral vision people reacted faster than if they were placed centrally.

Paul Ekman’s Seven Universal Emotions

Susan goes on to say ‘If you’re using pictures to communicate (for example, pictures of people at a Web site), use one of the seven basic emotions in the picture to communicate them most clearly.’

Christine Looser and T Wheatley (2010)

We Look Where Faces Look.

Colour, shapes, framing – presentation of language can influence what people see and how it is read.