Feature: Where Visual literacy and Interface Design meet

From archaeological records, we know that prehistoric cave dwellers were able to communicate with each other through signs and symbols. As mankind evolved, the form, function and meaning of visual communication changed drastically, but unfortunately, the understanding of the nature and importance of visual communication has not improved significantly over time. We generally accept that humans are dependent on vision for most of their information. Scientists tell us that visual communication is natural human behaviour which all normally sighted persons engage in every day and take for granted, yet it is the product of a complex human intelligence that is very poorly understood.

What we do know is that vision and visual communication are more than just one-way processes where one absorbs messages like a sponge. Visual communication is a dialogical process where the way a person perceives his environment is influenced by his knowledge and experience. Media specialists know that visual communication has the ability, through symbolism, denotation and connotation, to enable a person to interpret meanings hidden deep in visual images (paintings, photographs, film or television).

Particularly since the invention of the camera, the way that we express ourselves through visual images has undergone a dramatic change. It has led to the development of non-realistic and non-figurative ways to express ideas and communicate them to other people. However, the more powerful and pervasive the media, the more mistakes we are bound to make if we don’t understand the mechanisms of visual communication.

Role of communicator and receiver

Regardless of the level of realism in the visual codes used, the key to successful visual communication is the receiver's familiarity with the signs and symbols that the communicator is using. Because of the infinite variety of visual signs and the possibilities of their interpretation; because of differences between the designer’s and the user’s visual knowledge, the whole or part of the message may be unintelligible. In order to ensure that communicating by means of images is as effective as possible, the designer first has to ensure that the user is familiar with the visual codes used (for example, conventions for menus, icons, texture, shadow, light source, object overlapping, and many more). If the user is not visually literate, he or she has to receive some form of orientation or training. Furthermore, the more complex and technologically advanced the medium is, the more complex the visual codes are likely to be and the more attention must be paid to ensuring a common knowledge of visual codes and conventions.

The functionality of a computer application and its representation in the user interface is simply a message that the designer is trying to communicate to users. To ensure effective communication, the designer needs to use more than just his or her natural, inborn or intuitive, verbal and visual talents. It requires knowledge of the elements of visual communication of a particular medium, as well as the structuring and functioning of these elements in effective communication.

In modern interactive multimedia applications like games or computer-based training, designers pay a lot of attention to communicating a message effectively to a user. Clearly, those designers consciously or unconsciously do the right thing - they design for communication. Ironically, the same does not happen with mainstream business applications. Commercial applications like financial, insurance, human resources, information or logistic systems are generally not approached from a communication point of view. Here designers are more concerned with process validity and data integrity than with presentation of information or usability. Very little attention is paid to the nature of the visual dialogue (that is, communication) between the system and the user. Usability problems in such systems often point to an inadequate understanding of user needs and idiosyncrasies. This in turn may point to a need for a formal link between the disciplines of visual communication and software design.

Some practitioners will argue that they "do user-centred design", and assume that following a UCD approach tells them all there is to know about users and their tasks. While most practitioners agree that UCD should be a non-negotiable approach, it should include an understanding of visual literacy as an absolute prerequisite for the interface designer. It is not enough to adopt a user-centred design methodology. Designers should also understand that the computer is a visual communication medium and it is therefore imperative that they add an understanding of visual communication to their armoury. User-centred design methodologies commonly include a systematic analysis of users, their tasks and skills, abilities, limitations and performance criteria. It is however less common to approach their perceptual abilities from a communication point of view and even less common to consider how they might interpret the meaning of the interface and its intended functionality in this respect. To ensure effective communication, designers should know what a visual message consists of, how it is structured, how it conveys meaning and why one method of representation works better than another one.

UCD training does not typically address these questions and yet there can be little argument that only designers who have achieved a reasonable level of visual literacy will be able to rise above the mediocrity of popular design conventions. Only then can they take informed decisions about what is applicable, effective and aesthetically pleasing in interfaces. Given the necessary resources and skills, a visually literate person can produce visual messages that will contribute significantly to understanding and effective task performance.

The minimum that should be required of designers is an understanding of visual literacy from the perspective of the designer as well as the user. Because communication is a cyclical or dialogical process, visual literacy applies to both communicator (designer) and receiver (user). The parallels with the ISO 9241-11 definition of usability in the following definition should be immediately apparent:

For the designer: the ability to intentionally communicate information to a specified audience by means of the computer as the chosen medium. In order to ensure that the intended message is received and interpreted approximately as intended, the designer must understand a number of things:
• the principles of visual communication
• the visual coding characteristics of the computer
• the user's needs, knowledge and perception of the visual codes used
• how the user's perception of the visual image (the interface) is influenced by cultural factors.

For the user: the level of perceptual, cognitive and discriminatory skills and his/her knowledge of the codes and conventions of visual communication of the computer that will increase the probability that he/she will receive and interpret the intended message as intended.

Clearly, designers need a methodology that takes into consideration the dialogical nature of computer applications. There is ample proof that successful software usually "works" for two reasons: either because of the experience of a skilled, intuitive designer, or because the design team had employed a formal methodology where a large number of human factors and criteria were considered, including visual literacy.

In multicultural environments the need for visual literacy is particularly challenging, because designers need to consider and accommodate not just language differences, but also several other cultural variables, such as social norms, religion, gender roles, traditions, history and many others. All of these will manifest in visual communication in one way or another. At a psychological level, culture is complex and fragmented and is an integral part of a person's psyche. People also experience culture differently and on various levels. This influences their perception, understanding, behaviour and performance in work or play. Acknowledging the influence of cultural variables will ensure optimal structuring of the visual interface.

In order to understand how visual messages affect behaviour and performance, we first need to understand how meaning is conveyed in an image. We see this in various modes of visual representation: the object as it is perceived visually, the abstract attributes of an object, idea or event, and the symbolic attributes of an object. A person's visual literacy is consequently determined by his or her knowledge and understanding of the levels of visual representation that range from realism to abstraction and symbolism.

Basic elements of visual messages

All images are constructed from a combination of a number of basic elements that range from a simple point, to lines, to shapes, textures, shadows and overall visual organisation of the two-, three- and four-dimensional fields. The existence of so many elements or dimensions in images explains why visual perception is really a multidimensional cognitive process that is characterised by "parallel processing". This means that various physiological and cognitive processes involved in observation, recognition and signification are executed simultaneously.

Computer Screen Conventions

The structural elements of images can also be approached from the perspective of the designer who is primarily interested in converting the subject matter relating to the user's task into sequences of visually attractive and stimulating task events.

Within the framework of the usability requirements, there will be established conventions that can be applied with reliable results. Such conventions imply a standard way of communicating certain information to the user. Conventions are commonly used by organisations that follow a user-centred design approach and they typically document them in style guides. This is of course a good best-practice approach, but such style guides should be based upon analyses that include visual literacy considerations.

Conclusion

In this short overview of visual communication, I have tried to indicate that there is more to the design of user interfaces than "meets the eye"! The computer as communication medium is ideally suited to exploiting the principles of visualisation - visually attractive and culturally appropriate interfaces can serve as an intrinsic motivator in task performance. There are such obvious parallels between effective visual communication and usability that it is surprising that not more attention is paid to visual literacy in UCD. However, the diversity of disciplines and principles that are involved in interface design, make the task of the designer one of the most difficult and challenging in the information age. Interface designers with the ability to develop effective, state-of-the-art software with effective visual interfaces are rare. New technology requires us to update methodologies continually to accommodate new methods of representing and transferring information. We need advanced communication and technical skills to develop the systems that make effective use of the computer as a visual communication medium.

A large number of conventions are currently used by software developers and each one believes that his or her design is the right one. Many software developers like to believe that what they do is an "art" and therefore it is not surprising that conventions used at present are more the result of "art" than of science. Without denying a software developer his or her creativity, there is a great need for a formal method to ensure the communicative validity of such conventions as functional layout, icons and colour. UCD and User Experience specialists have always aimed to achieve this by using familiar symbols and signs from the user's environment, but more attention to formal principles of visual communication should make the results more predictable, or at least take some of the guesswork out of user interface design and ensure better utilisation of resources.

To the user, the interface is the system!

Jacques Hugo
Usability Sciences Consulting,
jacques@usabilitysa.co.za

For further reading:
Arnheim, R. 1974. Art and visual perception. Berkeley & LA: University of California.
Dondis, D.A. 1973. A primer of visual literacy. Cambridge: MIT.
Tufte, E.R. 1983. The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, Conn.: Graphics Press.
Tufte, E.R.1990. Envisioning Information. Graphics Press.
Tufte, E.R. 1996. Visual Explanation. Graphics Press.
Zettl, H. 1973. Sight Sound Motion. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

All change at the top for System Concepts
Source: System Concepts Ltd, 3 July 2009
 
Leslie Fountain has been promoted to joint Managing Director of leading usability consultancy System Concepts.

Life in UCD immortalised in fiction: you couldn't make it up
Source: UN, 2 July 2009
 
Sarah Herman's fictitious book on life in a user-centred design company has hit the shelves and The Guardian's book pages...

Interfaces Magazine - Issue 79: The Education Issue
Source: Interaction Group, 1 July 2009
 
The latest issue of Interfaces is now available as a free download from the Interaction Website.

Two new Behavioural research Tools from Noldus
Source: UN, 30 June 2009
 
Tool updates make on-site behavioural data collection easier.

Cell Phones that Listen and Learn
Source: MIT Technology Review, 29 June 2009
 
New software tracks a user's behavior by monitoring everyday sounds.

Top Six Don’ts for Usability Testing
Source: FutureNow Inc., 27 June 2009
 
Six tips for creating quality usability tests to ensure useful feedback from testers.

Usability: ‘Lovely software. But I can’t work it’
Source: FT.com, 26 June 2009
 
In a recent survey by Global Graphics, 77 per cent of office workers estimate they lose up to one hour a week because business software is difficult to use.

And what do you do?
Source: Dexo Design, 25 June 2009
 
How do you describe your job role? Here are the results of a recent 'Preferred UX/UI Title' Poll.

Most Doctors cite Usability as critical to Electronic Health Record Adoption
Source: TMCNet, 24 June 2009
 
It's all about 'meaningful use'.

Glossy monitors look good but can hurt
Source: QUT, 23 June 2009
 
A new advisory cites research which suggests high gloss monitors make users sit awkwardly.