When I was speaking at the January DesignWell conference in San Diego, it again became clear to me how determined many designers are to support the health of our planet.
Cognitive science-informed design is fundamentally consistent with environmentally responsible design objectives, even when the topics researched have no apparent connection to sustainability – for example, when the findings to be applied relate to surface or light colors seen and mental performance.
When design reflects and supports humans’ fundamental needs – to positively communicate, to accomplish the task at hand, and to refresh mentally, for instance – humans have fewer reasons to encourage changes to their world; and eliminating reasons to replace or change generally means resource use is optimized.
Sure, humans get bored over time with the world around them – but they also find gradual evolution of the physical environments they’re in more desirable than radical change. “Evolution” instead of “revolution” can mean more earth-friendly design. Changing a wall color or art or a circulation route is apt to have less effect on the future health of the planet than building a new structure, for instance.
Cognitive scientists have now investigated such a range of topics that considering scientific research findings is now possible when slews of design decisions are being made. How what we see, hear, touch, taste and smell influences what goes on in our brain has been explored in scores of studies. So have issues such as environmental control, privacy, interpersonal spacing, and other topics related to individuals’ and groups’ experiences with design in use.
Investigators have also thoroughly explored, in rigorous studies, how personality and cultures (both national and organizational) influence expectations and experiences related to design.
Using the term “informed” in the phrase “science-informed” is intentional. “Informed” means that the science adds insights to the design process but does not dictate outcomes. Research with surface color, for example, indicates that certain levels of saturation and brightness are more likely to relax viewers, for example. When applying that information, designers can specify many different hues, however, with the desired ranges of saturation and brightness. Stronger, and therefore more sustainable, solutions emerge from designer-scientist partnerships than “dictatorships.”
Science-informed design is environmentally responsible design.
Sally Augustin, PhD, is the editor of Research Design Connections (www.researchdesignconnections.com). Research Design Connections reports on research conducted by social and physical scientists that designers can apply in practice. Insights derived from recent studies are integrated with classic, still relevant findings in concise, powerful articles. Topics covered range from the cognitive, emotional, and physiological implications of sensory and other physical experiences to the alignment of culture, personality, and design, among others. Information, in everyday language, is shared in a monthly subscription newsletter, an archive of thousands of published articles, and a free daily blog. Readers learn about the latest research findings immediately, before they’re available elsewhere. Sally, who is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, is also the author of Place Advantage: Applied Psychology for Interior Architecture (Wiley, 2009) and, with Cindy Coleman, The Designer’s Guide to Doing Research: Applying Knowledge to Inform Design (Wiley, 2012). She is a principal at Design With Science (www.designwithscience.com) and can be reached at sallyaugustin@designwithscience.com.
