<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: design and emotions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://svirsk.org/2009/09/the-rise-of-emotional-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://svirsk.org/2009/09/the-rise-of-emotional-design/</link>
	<description>I&#039;m a User Experience Designer at Webjam</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:33:21 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sjors</title>
		<link>http://svirsk.org/2009/09/the-rise-of-emotional-design/comment-page-1/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>Sjors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://svirsk.org/?p=104#comment-61</guid>
		<description>Hi Nick,

Thanks for your reply, I&#039;m not a member yet, but I&#039;ll seriously contempt of joining it.

I think my main struggle at the moment is with words, concept and definitions. Maybe I should stay away from the word rational, because it&#039;s counterpart irrational has a completely different connotation than the relation between concious and unconscious (or subconscious) I guess that you can make unconscious rational decisions but that these would still count as being emotional? If also concious decisions would be made whilst using emotions, than what is the point of calling an concept Emotions and Design, when it is clear that all design  works with processed sensory input aka emotions. 

Maybe though I&#039;m looking for trouble and should stick with what is given. 95% of our decisions are not taken consciously, therefore (in de case of web applications) we should not focus on creating yet more features, longer list of functionalities or staring ourself blind on the price. We should work on all we can do to &quot;influence&quot; thought and action. Influencing thought and behaviour can therefore also not be done by checklist, what you have to do, depends on what you want to achieve and who you are. In a way delivering a good product/ service is as complicated/ multifaceted as being a good person</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Nick,</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply, I&#8217;m not a member yet, but I&#8217;ll seriously contempt of joining it.</p>
<p>I think my main struggle at the moment is with words, concept and definitions. Maybe I should stay away from the word rational, because it&#8217;s counterpart irrational has a completely different connotation than the relation between concious and unconscious (or subconscious) I guess that you can make unconscious rational decisions but that these would still count as being emotional? If also concious decisions would be made whilst using emotions, than what is the point of calling an concept Emotions and Design, when it is clear that all design  works with processed sensory input aka emotions. </p>
<p>Maybe though I&#8217;m looking for trouble and should stick with what is given. 95% of our decisions are not taken consciously, therefore (in de case of web applications) we should not focus on creating yet more features, longer list of functionalities or staring ourself blind on the price. We should work on all we can do to &#8220;influence&#8221; thought and action. Influencing thought and behaviour can therefore also not be done by checklist, what you have to do, depends on what you want to achieve and who you are. In a way delivering a good product/ service is as complicated/ multifaceted as being a good person</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Black</title>
		<link>http://svirsk.org/2009/09/the-rise-of-emotional-design/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://svirsk.org/?p=104#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Hi Sjors,

I like some of the points you’re raising in this post. I’m assuming you’re a member of The Design &amp; Emotion Society? If not you should join.

Regarding the need to move beyond rational motivations in design, I wholeheartedly agree. There is an overwhelming body of knowledge and research that highlights the importance of understanding emotion and unconscious motivation. You may appreciate some of the data (and references) in the following presentation: http://nickblackonblack.blogspot.com/2009/08/market-research-deeper-look-at-everyday.html

When making ‘the case’ for emotional design I find it’s important, and useful, to start with the following quote - &#039;it’s now the consensus amongst cognitive scientists, that 95% of all human thought is unconscious&#039;.   

The implication of this quote is twofold:
1. Emotions need to be taken seriously. They need to be understood and addressed.
2. If you don’t take the time to properly understand and address these deeper motivations, you’re missing out on the MAJORITY of market opportunities. YES it may require a shift in how we’ve always thought about research and design. YES it may require some new tools, approaches and techniques. But NO, it can’t be ignored.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Sjors,</p>
<p>I like some of the points you’re raising in this post. I’m assuming you’re a member of The Design &amp; Emotion Society? If not you should join.</p>
<p>Regarding the need to move beyond rational motivations in design, I wholeheartedly agree. There is an overwhelming body of knowledge and research that highlights the importance of understanding emotion and unconscious motivation. You may appreciate some of the data (and references) in the following presentation: <a href="http://nickblackonblack.blogspot.com/2009/08/market-research-deeper-look-at-everyday.html" rel="nofollow">http://nickblackonblack.blogspot.com/2009/08/market-research-deeper-look-at-everyday.html</a></p>
<p>When making ‘the case’ for emotional design I find it’s important, and useful, to start with the following quote &#8211; &#8216;it’s now the consensus amongst cognitive scientists, that 95% of all human thought is unconscious&#8217;.   </p>
<p>The implication of this quote is twofold:<br />
1. Emotions need to be taken seriously. They need to be understood and addressed.<br />
2. If you don’t take the time to properly understand and address these deeper motivations, you’re missing out on the MAJORITY of market opportunities. YES it may require a shift in how we’ve always thought about research and design. YES it may require some new tools, approaches and techniques. But NO, it can’t be ignored.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Sjors Timmer » Blog Archive » design and emotions -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://svirsk.org/2009/09/the-rise-of-emotional-design/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Sjors Timmer » Blog Archive » design and emotions -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 11:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://svirsk.org/?p=104#comment-6</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sjors Timmer. Sjors Timmer said: Wrote a blogpost on design and psychology, but still not sure if I get it, comments welcome :) http://bit.ly/A6dXc [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sjors Timmer. Sjors Timmer said: Wrote a blogpost on design and psychology, but still not sure if I get it, comments welcome <img src='http://svirsk.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  <a href="http://bit.ly/A6dXc" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/A6dXc</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
