Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
research indicates that the two human information processing systems, the affective and the
cognitive, are intertwined (Bargh, 2004; Ortony et al., 2005; Russell, 2003). Norman and his col-
leagues (Norman, 2002, 2004a; Ortony et al., 2005), suggest a hierarchical three-level theory
of human behavior that integrates the affective and the cognitive systems. At each level, the world
is being evaluated (affect) and interpreted (cognition). At bottom, the visceral level surveys the
environment and rapidly communicates affective signals to the higher levels. The routine (or
behavioral) level is where most of our learned behavior takes place. Finally, the reflection level is
where the highest-level processes occur. One important role of affect in human behavior stems
from the fact that some of its reactions are very rapid (Pham et al., 2001; Norman, 2004a) it can
color subsequent cognitive processes because our thoughts normally occur after the affective sys-
tem has transmitted its initial information. Aesthetic evaluations may take place on all three
levels of Norman et al.'s model, but there are some hints that the first aesthetic impressions are
affective, are formed immediately at a low level, and thus precede cognitive processes (Zajonc
and Markus, 1982; Pham et al., 2001; Norman, 2004a). Hence, the immediate affective reactions
may color and potentially sway successive cognitive processes (Pham et al., 2001; Duckworth
et al., 2002).
It should be noted that it is not necessary for aesthetic impressions to be extremely rapid in
order to leave their traces on subsequent decision processes. This is because in many cases aes-
thetic evaluations of an object can be made faster than evaluations of other, more latent attributes
of the object. The phenomenon of aesthetic perceptions of an object coloring other perceived
attributes of the same object is familiar in the social sciences. Cowley (2000) suggests that “we're
designed to care about looks, even though looks aren't earned and reveal nothing about character”
(p. 193). Thus, in what is known as the “beautiful is good” stereotype, a person's attractiveness
was found to affect how people perceive other attributes of that person (Dion et al., 1972; Eagly
et al., 1991). The effects of the “beautiful is good” stereotype are pervasive and consequential. For
example, beautiful people earn more in the marketplace (Hamermesh and Biddle, 1994), and better-
looking university instructors receive higher teaching evaluations (Hamermesh and Parker, 2005).
Still, it is important to note that the effect of attractive objects is not restricted to first impressions
and brief encounters. It is also worth emphasizing that aesthetic evaluations are made not only
immediately but they are also based on more elaborated cognitive and affective processes
(Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson, 1990; Norman, 2004). Those later evaluations may be based on
different aesthetic criteria (e.g., symbolic references hidden in the artifact; fine details that escape
first impressions; relations with other objects in the environment), but they, too, serve an impor-
tant function in shaping our attitudes towards objects. Langlois et al. (2000) concluded that the
“effects of facial attractiveness are robust and pandemic, extending beyond initial impressions of
strangers to actual interactions with those whom people know and observe” (p. 404).
Similar results to those obtained in the social world were also observed in human-computer
interaction. A strong evidence for the immediacy of first aesthetic impression in IT was provided
by Fernandes et al. (2003). They found that attractiveness evaluations of Web pages to which par-
ticipants were exposed for only 500 ms were very highly correlated with attractiveness evaluations
of the same pages under unlimited exposure. We have recently replicated and validated these find-
ings (Tractinsky et al., 2004). Then, aesthetic impressions may affect how people perceive other
system attributes (Tractinsky et al., 2000). We still do not have direct evidence that the aesthetics
of IT impacts users' decision processes, but evidence regarding the influence of affect on decision
making exist in other fields (e.g., Isen, 2001).
Obviously, the fact that some aesthetic impressions are formed immediately does not imply any
deterministic consequences in human-computer interaction, just as human-human interactions are
Search WWH ::
Custom Search