FrankMarchak
Universal Design
In the course of both
learning and applying the
techniques of visual
design, I have been struck
by the degree to which
O the average person is
• ~ capable of judging
•g..a whether or not a particu-
lar design is pleasing, but
incapable of describing in
$'-.'4 detail what drives this
decision. Design courses
4---,) teach basic principles of
visual design, and indi-
viduals well trained in this
discipline can provide
•,,,,,,",,,,,,,,I explanations in terms
such as harmony, con-
trast, balance, and align-
ment. Further, the same
• ""4 basic principles can be
extended to other design
domains, such as archi-
tecture or product design.
But upon what basis are
these principles derived?
One possible explanation
relates to the constraints of both the
physical world and the design of our
perceptual systems.
The natural world is filled with diver-
sity. One million species of animals,
three hundred thousand species of
plants, and over three thousand types of
minerals have been identified, with
more being added regularly (Lapedes,
1977). To the casual observer, nature
appears limitless in its ability to create
and modify the shape of its creations.
Upon closer examination, however, this
myriad of forms is in fact constructed
from a limited number of relatively sim-
ple shapes, determined by the combina-
tion of a number of constraints. The
patterns and forms employed by nature
are restricted by the constraints of phys-
ical space, the relations between area
and volume, and the need to minimize
resource consumption (Stevens, 1974).
D'Arcy Thompson's On Growth and
Form (1942) is a classic account of the
16 April 1998 Volume30, Number 2
way things grow and the shapes they
take. In this work, Thompson examines
an array of physical constraints that
explain the necessary size of elephants
and ants, as well as the spiral, rather
than cylindrical, shape of animal horns.
Stevens' Patterns in Nature (1974) sup-
plements and extends Thompson's work
to include patterns of many inanimate
as well as animate forms, showing that
nature favors combinations of spirals,
meanders, branching and three-way
joints.
Consider, by way of example, three sep-
arate points in space. O f the infinite
number of ways these points might be
connected together, a configuration that
uses connecting lines separated by 120 +
angles uses the least amount of material.
Such economical three-way junctions of
120 ° angles are found widely in nature.
Soap bubbles, which form minimum
surfaces that keep the least possible sur-
face area between them, join together
with 120 + angles between them. Bees
build hexagonal cells not because of
some innate knowledge of geometry but
because, given the constraints of physi-
cal space, this configuration permits
using the least amount of wax to store
the greatest amount of honey while
expending the least amount of energy.
Cracks in mud, the shape of an insect's
compound eye, and the joints between
the plates of a tortoise shell are further
examples of this ubiquitous phenome-
non.
The main point here is that the struc-
ture of space influences the shapes of all
things. Because of spatial structure, the
possible number of shapes is limited. In
showing that there are other spaces in
which patterns and forms differ from
our own, Einstein (1920) helped drive
home the notion that objects assume the
shapes they do because of the way space
constrains our world. He showed that
the forms and patterns in our own space
would differ from those in other spaces,
such as the space of atomic particles or
at the scale of the universe as a whole.
SIGCHI Bulletin
Because our perceptual systems are
adapted to the space in which we live,
these other spaces cannot be perceived
directly, although they can be described
mathematically.
How these various shapes and patterns
actually come into being can be attrib-
uted to several factors. The examples
above suggest that things evolve to their
fittest form; a notion applicable to most
living things in the environment. A sec-
ond notion involves the principle that
things tend toward configurations of
least energy, be it the least motion or the
closest fit.
Regardless of why patterns and shapes
occur as they do, it is apparent that the
world is in fact highly structured. Much
of what at first glance appears to be ran-
dom and different in design is in fact
made up of similar basic shapes. Species
evolving in an environment would ben-
efit from perceptual systems that reliably
recover these environmental regulari-
ties. Because the natural world is made
up of objects whose shapes are deter-
mined by the constraints of physical
space, the process of visual perception
would be simplified if the information
provided by these constraints were avail-
able in the perceptual stimulus and
detected by the visual system. The study
o f the recovery of this information has
been the focus of investigation from a
variety of perspectives.
The Gestalt psychologists were inter-
ested in the recovery of structure in
terms of perceptual organization. They
proposed "laws of organization" that
describe what perception would be
given certain stimulus conditions; sim-
plicity, similarity, nearness and good
continuation are well known examples.
Gibson's (1979) ecological approach
provides a more recent example of the
search for environmental constraints on
visual perception.
What all this implies is that the elements
of good design are an innate part of the
physical and natural world; the same
spiral shape can be seen in seashells, ani-
mal horns, and flowing water. Over the
centuries, mankind has abstracted these
basic principles and applied them to the
design of artifacts; the same use of sim-
ple lines defines both Shaker architec-
ture and Bauhaus furniture. However,
little thought has been given as to why
these elemental topics taught in design
courses - line, form, shape - serve as the
building blocks of all design. I propose
that the constraints of our perceptual
systems and the world around us deter-
mine the basic elements. Those trained
in the visual arts can articulate these
structures since they've been trained in
their abstract vocabulary. However, even
those without training are imbued with
the innate ability to discern these design
differences, thanks to evolution and
physics. It appears that the notion of
being able to "know good design when I
see it" has a stronger element of truth in
it than has been previously thought.
References
Einstein, A. (1920). Relativity: The spe-
cial and general theory A popular expo-
sition. London.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological
approach to visual perception. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Lapedes, D. (1977). McGraw-Hill Ency-
clopedia of Science and 7bchnolog)~
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Stevens, P. S. (1974). Patterns in nature.
Boston: Atlantic-Little, Brown.
Thompson, D'Arcy. (1942). On growth
andj~rm. Cambridge, England: The
University Press.
About the Author
Frank M. Marchak is Principal Human
Factors Engineer at TASC in Reading,
Massachusetts, where he leads human-
computer interaction design and usabil-
ity engineering efforts for government
and commercial clients. He received the
Ph.D. degree in Experimental Psychol-
ogy from Dartmouth College and the
A.B. degree in psychology from
Muhlenberg College.
Contact
Frank M. Marchak
TASC
55 Walkers Brook Drive
Reading, MA 01867, USA
FMMarchak@smtpgate.read.tasc.com
Visual Interaction Design is a Special
Interest Area of SIGCHI s~cusing on the
visual aspects of interaction in inter~ce
design. The goals of the Visual Interaction
Design Special Interest Area are to act as a
SIGCHI Bulletin Volume 30, Number 2
j~cal point j~r visual interaction design
interest within SIGCHI, to advance
visual interaction design as an integral
component of HCI, and to integrate visual
interaction design with the rest o f SIG-
CHL
73 contribute injGrmation to this column,
send email to fmmarchak@tasc.com or
s~rd@elab.com, or write to Frank M.
Marchak, TASC, 55 Walkers Brook
Drive, Reading, M A 01867, U.S.A. or
Shannon Ford, E-Lab LLC, 213 IF~st
Institute Place, Suite 509, Chicago, IL
60610 U.S.A.
73 subscribe to the Visual Interaction
Design ListServ group, send email to
L IS TSER V@ VTVM1. CC. V77ED U
with the single line:
subscribe VISUAL-L <your name>
in the body. 7b unsubscribe, send mail to
the same address with the single line:
,i~off VTSUAL-L
in the body 7b communicate with mem-
bers o f the Visual Interaction Design com-
munity, send email to visual-
l @vtvm I. cc. vt. edu.
You can also access the list via bboard:
internet.computing, visual-1
April 1998 17