Week 1: reading response
Week 2: reading response
Week 3: reading response
Week 4: reading response
Week 5: reading response
Week 6: reading response
Week 7: reading response
Week 8: reading response
Week 9: reading response
For this week's reading response, I would like to reflect on three design principles from the book:

Principle 2.3: Sometimes, function follows form.
Principle 2.6: Technology should create calm.
Principle 2.7: Design to lower inhibition.

Principle 2.3: Sometimes, function follows form.
This principle makes me think of how almost 90% of my friends use the Kindle digital reader as a lid to cover instant noodles while they are being prepared. The designers of the Kindle might not have expected this, but it has become one of the primary, if not the only, functions for which people use the Kindle. We use it as a sealer because it has the perfect form to cover boiling instant noodles. Another example might be the simile that likens a Nokia phone to a hammer in the early 2000s.

Personally, I feel like this type of ‘misuse’ of the intended function of a form should fall under the term “serendipity” – discovering something useful in an unexpected context.

Principle 2.6: Technology should create calm.
In the neuroscience world, calm is often associated with reducing cortisol levels in the HPA axis (Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Adrenaline Axis). Research (Khalfa et al., 2003) has shown that music is a suitable exogenous stimulus for eliciting such stress reduction. This is probably why the ocarina can make US soldiers feel calm. (Also, consider the idyllic scene video from Assassin's Creed!) I like it, lol.

I think the claim that “technology should create calm” is a bit over-generalized. Technology should elicit various psychological and physiological responses, including calm, happiness, passion, agitation, hope, flow, etc. In my opinion, I want to develop a music technology that everyone enjoys improvising with, involving complex harmony, and enjoying the dopamine rush from the instant feedback of chord syntax that it provides to people. In this sense, I oppose the claim “technology should create calm.” I think “technology should create passion.”

Reference: Khalfa, S., BELLA, S. D., Roy, M., Peretz, I., & Lupien, S. J. (2003). Effects of relaxing music on salivary cortisol level after psychological stress. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 999(1), 374-376.

Principle 2.7: Design to lower inhibition
Since this book was published in 2018, when recommender systems were not viral, I think this type of minimalistic appeal is accurate. However, the lower inhibition feature is a double-edged sword in 2023 since it can lead users into an “information cocoon” and cause them to lose their autonomy. From my observations, many teenagers overdose on recommender-based social media like Xiaohongshu, Douyin (TikTok), and Zhihu in China Mainland 2023. The system understands their user behavior and continuously pushes posts that have been ‘voted up’ by many peers, starting to brainwash them and make them anxious about the content. Because the pushed information usually stresses discussions about how wealthy, competitive, and good-looking their peers are, and because there are many ‘likes’ on these posts, teenagers begin to feel peer pressure and become pessimistic about themselves. Consequently, their cortisol levels increase, making them feel worse. This is exactly a counter-example of “Design to lower inhibition” as illustrated by the recommender system.