CoP Practical Investigation

Study Task 4 helped me to clarify and engage with some potential ideas for the practical side of this module, this section in particular:

Exploration & Evaluation

How will I use practical skills and what experiments? Memory tests; successful logos are always memorable for the right reasons, this could be part of my experiment with existing logos that everyone knows. Why do we remember certain logos? Is it because of how they are designed and what they look like or because of what we know they represent? Memory research, do certain people remember different things to others? Why?

Six Principles of Gestalt:

Similarity

Continuation

Closure

Proximity

Figure and Ground

Symmetry and Order

Ideas:

- 100 logos comparison, quick show to audience, which stand out? What is the purpose of this investigation? To find out which logos are the most dominant and why? Which principles do they include? Combinations?

- Leon Festinger theory - Cognitive Dissonance (research into this, how does it relate)

- Create a logo using different combinations, weakest to strongest? Building up logo adding a principle at each stage?

- Brand Gestalt? Is this necessary, who would refer to it? 

- Investigate one area in more detail, take logos that don't have this principle and add it in?

After considering my ideas thoroughly I have decided that I don't want to pinpoint a specific visual outcome until I have completed all of my research. My research will be in-depth and thorough, it will cover all aspects and a range of relevant questions.

Background Research:

Willis and Todorov:

Willis and Todorov conducted separate experiments to study judgments from facial appearance, each focusing on a different trait: attractiveness, likeability, competence, trustworthiness, and aggressiveness. Participants were shown photographs of unfamiliar faces for 100 milliseconds (1/10 of a second), 500 milliseconds (half a second), or 1,000 milliseconds (a full second), and were immediately asked to judge the faces for the trait in question (e.g., “Is this person competent?”). Response time was measured. Participants were then asked to rate their confidence in making their judgments.

Participants’ judgments were compared with ratings of the same photographs given by another group of participants in a preliminary study, in which there were no time constraints for judging the personality traits of the faces. (In that preliminary study, there was strong agreement among the various participants about the traits of the people in the photographs.)

For all five of the traits studied, judgments made after the briefest exposure (1/10 of a second) were highly correlated with judgments made without time constraints; and increased exposure time (1/2 or a full second) didn’t increase the correlation. Response times also revealed that participants made their judgments as quickly (if not more quickly) after seeing a face for 1/10 of a second as they did if given a longer glimpse.

Longer exposure times did increase confidence in judgments and facilitated more differentiated trait impressions (that is, less correlation between the different traits for a given person).

All the correlations between judgments made after a 1/10-second glimpse and judgments made without time constraints were high, but of all the traits, trustworthiness was the one with the highest correlation. Along with attractiveness, this was also the trait that participants were able to assess most quickly. The authors suggest, based on evolutionary psychology, that an accelerated and accurate ability to judge trustworthiness in others may have evolved as an important survival mechanism.

This experiment is extremely relevant to my questionnaire and survey, first impressions are important and the initial impact of the logo is what I am trying to figure out, which is the strongest. The time in which we make an initial judgement is extremely short, as little as a tenth of a second and we can make a judgement that is unlikely to change. 

Rationale

The purpose of this experiment is to truly find out the hierarchy of importance of the six main Gestalt principles in relation to logo design, from extensive research I can see that this hasn’t been done in formal and scientific environment before.. This will not only help me as a designer but will become a guide for other designers within logo design as a constructive set of rules to follow. The six key principles are Closure, Proximity, Symmetry, Figure and Ground, Continuation and Similarity, a logo that represents each of these categories will be used in this test to see which is the most appealing to the participant.

The audience for the results of my experiment will predominantly be designers, however as Gestalt began as a psychological theory it could also be considered as an approach to the principles to see if this had any correlation between the design aspect and the psychological. As a designer, I am also the main audience for this experiment; it is for me personally to give me an advantage within my practical designs to give me the best guide to creating a logo.

The participants chosen to take part will be a varied range from design students to an older range of people who aren’t involved with the design or art industry, this will give fair and unbiased results.

 The message is largely to show how theories developed hundreds of years ago, as in this case, can be applied to contemporary design in a useful and beneficial way. If they are successful as a psychological theory then considering the separate components and principles and exploring how they can be enforced within design gives us more of a insight into the human mind and how we interpret visuals.

In terms of tone of voice, this will be a scientific experiment to an extent; it will be carried out seriously with all aspects in mind of affecting factors that need to be considered. As the results of this experiment will directly inform me I want to create an observation with a legitimate and strong outcome.

There will be two separate experiments that will use the same components, one will be on paper and one will be in digital format. The paper experiment gives the audience the chance to take their time when choosing the order of the logos, this shows how long term impressions can affect the decision and the brands can influence the audience. The second experiment will be a digital test, the same six logos will be flashed upon a screen for a short amount of time, the participant will have to immediately write down which logo they were drawn to initially.

There are several factors that could slightly complicate my results; firstly the participants could be influenced by the logos themselves and the personal relation they have to them causing them to choose this logo over personal preference rather than initial sight. Secondly, gathering a range of categories of people could be difficult, the people used may predominantly be design related if I struggle to reach people from further afield.

Experiment outline:

Considering the six main principles of Gestalt Theory, I will use six specific logos, one from each category to compile a questionnaire and a test. The point of this is to see which of these the audience are the most drawn to, the corresponding principle will then be investigated further. 

Hypothesis:

One or two dominant principles will be outlined through the two tests, if there is one obvious principle then this will be the key strongest feature of a logo , if there are more than one with equal response then this combination will show the most successful pairing. 

Development:

Once the results have been analysed I will research into other logos that fit the appropriate category. 

Research 1:

Paper Questionnaire 

This questionnaire will show the logos I have chosen and ask the respondent to label them 1-6 in relation to which they were drawn to/which is the most memorable, and in what order.

Research 1 considerations:

1. Time - Participants have much longer to look at the logos on this questionnaire, it isn't a time restrictive view of the logos which means they could be influenced by the brand itself.

Solution - Take out any names in the logos if it isn't necessarily part of it, concentrating on the image is the main purpose of this and it would have less influence if there was no type. Ask them to complete it right there and then in front of me and hand it back, it should take them no more than 20 seconds.  

2. Colour - Colour can draw attention especially if it is bold or bright.

Solution - make all logos black and white, colour is not one of the principles so this should be irrelevant to an extent, this will make the test fair and consistent.

3. Feedback - Because I don't have control over who actually takes the test and s it is all anonymous people might not bother to respond, this could lead to lack of response which wouldn't lead to fair results.

Solution - Create this as a paper questionnaire so I can physically give it to people and get them to fill it out, this heightens the chance of them actually filling it in.

Research 2:

Quick flash response test

This test will consist of the participant standing in front of me whilst I flip a board with the six logos on, referring to the Willis and Torodov study I will base my times on this.

Research 2 considerations:

1. Time - It will be difficult to flip he board so that it shows for exactly 'nth' of a second, this could differ from one test to the next.

Solution - Make this test digital and set it on a timer using powerpoint, this way it is controlled and precise, meaning the results will be more accurate. 

2. Distractions - People and surroundings could distract the participant whilst carrying out this test

Solution - The setting needs to be a plain room, with no noise and no other people. 

3. Colour - Colour can draw attention especially if it is bold or bright.

Solution - make all logos black and white, colour is not one of the principles so this should be irrelevant to an extent, this will make the test fair and consistent.

4. Layout - Keeping the layout consistent may affect the results, we could be drawn naturally to the top left corner.

Solution - Create a range of combinations that allows each logo to be in each position at least once. 

Experiment 1: Paper Questionnaire

Original logo/Black and White version

Logo decisions

The six logos that I have chosen for this experiment each represent one of the key six principles of Gestalt. However I am aware that some of the principles overlap each other within the designs, this is unavoidable so I have tried to eliminate this as much as possible. 

Paper Questionnaire. Each logo is equal in size, same colour and proportionally set out. This allows for maximum levels of fairness and unbiased direction.

Pilot Questionnaire:

I chose to do a quick pilot questionnaire and collect 15 results, I wanted to check that nothing was confusing and people were understanding the survey. 

Results:

Everything seemed to be okay in terms of clear and simple instructions however many people seemed to be selecting the IBM logo as the most eye catching. It has now occurred to me that this could be because it is the top left image and we are possibly very used to looking at this first.

As a result of this problem I have changed the layout of the images on each questionnaire, there are now a range of patterns so the layout is different on each one. This will give me a more accurate set of results. 

As this questionnaire was taken out within the studio I am aware that the results could be slightly affected as those that have filled it in all have an eye for design. To rectify this I will undertake my real questionnaire on both design academic students and those in other fields. The wider variety of people I can get the better, I need to focus on all ages and people from all different careers.

Each logo is placed in each of the six spaces, rotating on the questionnaire, they will be presented at random but each questionnaire will be shown the same amount of times throughout. 

Experiment 2: Digital Test

Pilot:

The pilot for this experiment was key to allow me to find out what time would be the most appropriate to show the images for. 

I used my laptop to carry out this pilot, although this isn't the scale it will be done on it gives me an idea of what timing is necessary. 

5 at 1/10 of a second - 4 recorded it as too quick, 1 said he spotted one familiar logo

5 at 1/2 a second - 4 clearly able to distinguish which was the initial logo they saw

5 at 1 second - All able to look at logos and read words clearly

The initial time of 1/10th of a second which I anticipated would be the best time was actually too fast, as there are 6 logos I need the audience to have time to very briefly take in the page before they are drawn to one, this was too difficult for them to distinguish any.

I found that 1 second was too long, they were able to identify the logos and this could have an influence on them from a personal preference of brand. 

This therefore meant that 1/2 a second was a much more appropriate time, they were able to take in the whole slide and all six logos but not too long that they were able to know too much in depth what each one was and make the connections. 

Location: 

- Neutral

- No distractions e.g. people

- Fairly empty surroundings

- No visual noise surrounding screen

- No sound noise

The location I will use is the projector in studio  after 5pm, it is usually quiet to empty at this time and so will be quiet. The walls are plain and I can move anything out of the way to reduce distractions. 

Distance:

Using a screen size / seat position calculator I figured out the prime position for my participants to sit/stand. I measured the screen as 68" wide, this means thats 9.5 feet or 2.90m is the perfect distance away to see the whole screen. I will measure this out accurately and use tape to mark the place. 

The participant I have decided will stand at the appropriate distance rather than sit, looking at the screen at eye level will be much better than looking up at it, the eyeliner will be direct and equal in terms of positioning. 

Recording Results:

Recording the results immediately is very important, I think it is imperative that the participant records their own results rather than trying to describe which they think they saw first to me. I will create a sheet of the same layout which they will cross or mark the appropriate box. There will be a table placed in front of them and they will be given a pen, they will quickly cross the box that is their choice. 

Recording Sheet

The recording sheet will be very simple, just the 6 boxes that replicate the positioning of the logos so it is easy and quick to jot down their answer.

The initial slide quickly explains the instructions in simple terms, this slide is timed for 20 seconds so it gives them time to read it and ask any questions if necessary.

 

I created six combinations so that the logos were in a different position on each one, each presentation will be used the same amount of times to give equal results.

I amended these six presentations later on to the new space logo...

Who will take part in this?

- Peers

- Adults within university

- Other course students

- Adults outside of university/not in the design industry

As this is a very design based group of people I am aiming to recreate the setting at home somewhere and get other people involved who are not so design related, other ages from much younger to much older. 

University location set up:

These are the two possible locations I could use in uni, the left would be the ideal location as there is little visual distractions but this could be more difficult to get for a long period of time and to get people into. 

Experiment 1 Results

Method: This pilot will consist of 60 paper tests, this will give me a large enough sample to gather some strong results from without being too time consuming. It will be distributed to a range of people from designers of all ages to people outside of university that represent non design students. Again all the layouts will be random but an equal amount of each combination will be printed and used.

Results: 30% of people chose IBM, 28.3% chose the Guild of Food Writers, 21.6% chose the Mitsubishi logo, 8.3% chose Columbia, 6.6% chose Adidas and 5% chose the Space logo.

Conclusion: There is a clear divide between the logo characteristics that the audience was drawn to. Almost a third chose the IBM logo representing closure; closely behind this were The Guild of Food Writers and Mitsubishi, which represented figure/ground and symmetry. IBM was the strongest answer with almost a third of people being drawn to this immediately, there were two second close contenders which obviously hold strong characteristics, symmetry, and figure and ground are both also important I have found. Proximity, similarity and continuation seemed to have little impact when it comes to grabbing the attention of the audience immediately and are not predominant principles. 

Experiment 2 Results

My location decision was neither of my two options from earlier, I decided to go with the seminar room, although this was slightly tucked away it was more suitable in terms of no noise and no distractions surrounding the screen. This experiment will be carried out over several days so I can get as many results as possible with the time I have. 

I measured out the 9.5 feet distance from the screen and set up a table for the participant to stand at with their sheet to write the answer. After they have ticked the necessary box, I will then write the name of the logo on the sheet for my own benefit. I don't want to present the actual logos on the sheet they will be writing on as I feel that when they look down at the sheet this could change their mind, so six empty boxes are more appropriate to creating a fair test.

The overall results of the digital test showed that there were three main contenders; these were Mitsubishi, The Guild of Food Writers and Columbia. Space and Adidas were next and IBM at the very bottom with a low overall score of three.

Conclusion

After carrying out my two experiments I found the results were very interesting to compare and were not quite what my hypothesis predicted. The paper results showed that there were three dominant logos; IBM, Mitsubishi and the Guild of Food writers, these represented the corresponding principles; Closure, Symmetry and Order, and Figure and Ground. However, when I then enforced a time constraint within the digital experiment the results were similar in some ways but very different in others. Mitsubishi, The Guild of Food Writes and the Columbia logo all scored similarly high results to one another; Columbia was a very low scorer in the paper test so this was a big contrast. What also surprised me were the results counted for the IBM logo, scoring just 3 overall out of 60 participants this was the least noticed in the digital test, comparing this to being the highest rank in the paper section. My reasoning for this is the lack of bold intensity in the IBM logo means it is easily lost when seen for such a short amount of time, for the law of closure this suggests to me that having such a high amount of negative space isn’t always beneficial for first impressions.

The logos that were successful in both tests were Mitsubishi and The Guild of Food Writers, these represented Symmetry and Order and Figure and Ground. As these were both high scoring on both paper and screen this tells me that both as an initial impression and when considered for a lengthy time these logos are both strong in terms of being memorable to the audience. The logos that were unsuccessful in both paper and digital were the Space and Adidas logo that represented Continuity and Proximity. These were both rarely seen first in both tests and therefore suggest of having little element of interest. This also resolves my query of whether larger and more popular brands would influence the audience’s decision just because the brand itself is more widely known. Adidas is one of the biggest sports brands in the UK however this logo scored poorly all round; this tells me that the audience was not necessarily influenced by personal likes and dislikes.

Overall I feel that my experiment has given me great results, even though on both tests there wasn’t one clear stand out logo, there was still a definite divide between the logos that were a popular choice and those that were rarely chosen. When overlaying the results of the two I have found that it is important when designing a logo to first and foremost consider both Symmetry and Order, and Figure and Ground, these are the two that as a combination result in a more memorable and defined logo. Although all principles should be considered these are the two that should be at the forefront of our mind in the creative stage of branding.