In Chapter One, McLuhan points out that modern media focuses on action more than the content of the communication message. He brings up “somnambulism”, or sleepwalking, which in the context of how it’s used – i.e., “Apple pie is neither good nor bad; it is the way that it is used that determines it’s value” – I take to mean that he is pointing out that new media evolutions allow people to become less and less engaged in the meaning of the message and, perhaps, focused more on the form or even perception of the message. “Concern with effect rather than meaning is a basic change of our electric time…”.
I can see the truth in that. Communications post-internet do tend to be content that fits its intended media, as opposed to what people might expect to be meaningful content. In addition, communications media tend to move at a faster and faster pace. He also asserts that light bulbs are a communication media that, though they are full of information, are actually void of an actual message because they move too quickly for “sender” and “receiver” to communicate. I liked his comment that with technology it could be said that egg invented the chicken to get more eggs.
In Chapter Two, he gets into a fairly confusing discussion on hot and cold media, and hot and cold cultures. I think that if people were not again using “hot” to describe things that are “cool”, which at one time were known to be “hot”, this discussion would be less confusing. In addition, I felt that he lacked a full description describing “tribal” societies and could have added more specific information to describe the types of people he was referring to.
Generally, though, this was a very short introduction to McLuhan. I think if I had read farther into the book, I would have a more substantial opinion of the text.
When it happened, I was hoped for sparks and for everything to start moving in slow motion. Instead I got a purple graph. It was still pretty excited. I made funny noises.
How they were used: I expected that people would use them to purchase their tickets. But, I also noticed that people used them to see what movies were playing. And, sometimes they tested the machines to see if they could purchase tickets for a movie that was sold out.
Overall take-away about self-ticketing machines Most of the time we use technology we’re not being watched by people whose opinions we actually care about. Given the context, it seems like the self-ticketing machines are in an environment in which key members of your social group are around you watching you use a machine that could possibly make you look stupid. If I were designing self-ticketing machines, I would keep in mind that clarity and ease of use are important to users, so that they don’t look stupid to the people who are important to them. For the most part that’s true, except in the purchasing part, which is the part that actually matters.
I. Difficulties
Responsiveness of the machines: At the Loews Theater on 3rd Ave, the machine didn’t respond to very well, which prompted the person using the machine to touch the screen repeatedly.
Confusion when using the credit card swipe: Both at the Loews and at Regal Union Square Stadium 14, I observed at least two people becoming confused when trying to use the credit card machine. At Loews, I was too far away to notice read the screen to see what particular problem the woman was having, but the effect was that she tried to swipe her card about 4-5 times before she finally completed her purchase. At the other theater, the difficulty another person experienced with the credit card swipe had to do with the fact that she kept swiping her card in the wrong direction. Eventually, she was able to figure it out.
Even myself, at yet another theater, City Cinemas Village East, I had difficulty using the machine, too. Twice. First, I used my debit card to pay and when I got to a numeric keyboard display, I assumed that what I needed to press was my PIN, when I actually needed to press my zip code. The result was that I canceled the process. Then when I tried again, I got this screen. It’s a very accurate picture, as you can tell.
Inconsistency within the self-ticketing machine.
II. Completion time
When used correctly, the machine takes less than one minute to operate, from selecting a movie to picking up your tickets. I observed someone using the machine in under a minute. Actually, it was probably more like 30 seconds. (I looked away so that the people inside the theater lobby wouldn’t think I was stalking them. When I looked back, the person had finished.) At any stage during the process, it seems that you get about 1.5-2 minutes to complete a step before it asks if you need more time. With continued inactivity, it cancels the process and returns to the “home” screen.
III. Context of use
There were a couple of things I noticed about people using these machines that were affected by the general layout of the theater and the general social atmosphere of the environment at the movies.
Theater Layout: The Regal Cinema at Union Square had the most issue with layout affecting self-ticketing machines because at the Loews Theater on 3rd Ave, most people purchase their tickets from the person in the ticket booth outside, so they have their tickets before entering the theater. The biggest effect layout had on people using the self-ticketing machines had to do with crowding. This effect was exacerbated by the social context of people going to the movies.
The crowding effect – In the ticket machine room, there are about 15-18 machines. Most of them are grouped underneath the light board showing the movie titles and schedule. If you’re like me, when you walk into Regal Union Square Stadium 14, the first thing you do is turn right into this room, because it’s faster than waiting in line. I observed that as soon as people walked into this space they tended to stop a few feet from the entrance to the room in order to read the board. Stopping in front of the entrance, of course, blocks anyone else from coming in…which blocks people from using the machines.
(Solution!) To fix this problem, my thought was that if the board were on a different wall, this would get a better flow of people through the space. Particularly if it were on a back wall, since the majority of the people didn’t come more than two-thirds into the room.
Social Context of Use – If you’re not like me when you go to the movies, this probably means you have come to the movies with at least one other person. When people arrived at the theater, they often came with friends and family, or they came alone and then met up with another person. So pretty much anything that a person does at the theater, they do with another person or more. When people are interacting with the self-ticketing machines, what really happens is that there are at least two people standing at one machine watching the screen while one of them actually touches the interface. I also noticed that even when there are more than two people are at the theater together all of them stand around the machine while to purchase their tickets.
This is why I feel that it’s very important that these machines not make people look like they don’t know how to operate a machine. Their friends are watching. Their date is watching. It’s not cool to make someone look dumb when they’re out on a date.
My last two observations to note are: “Proximity to the machine” and “What else do people do in self-ticketing space?”.
Proximity: When purchasing tickets, I noticed that when a person reached the point of purchase, he or she took a step closer to the machine. Maybe this behavior is just to get close enough to actually swipe their credit card effectively, or maybe it’s just that people feel better when they’re standing closer to the machine when paying for their tickets. Anyway, getting closer to the machines can be difficult in a crowded theater.
Sometimes, people also had a tendency to sort of play with the machines. Occasionally, a person who clearly did not intend to purchase a ticket would go to a machine and touch it as if they were going to purchase a ticket. When people did this, they often stood a little farther away from the machine, so that the machine was not really too much in their personal space. They also stood at an angle to the machine, so that they were not “squared off” in front of it – shoulders and hips aligned on top of each other so as to create a square, directly facing the machine.
What else do people do in the self-ticketing space: Aside from waiting around and chatting with their friends, the majority of people were using their cell phones. It seemed sometimes that maybe 50% of the people in the space were on the phone. They used their phones before and after purchasing tickets, perhaps to see what other movies were playing nearby, and possibly also to purchase tickets via their phone.
Alone again at the movies, I think I was the only person watching people use the self-ticketing machines.
“People perceive those that are overconfident to be competent, which in turn gives them power. This irritating effect may clarify a lot about the past decade in American life.” — Jerry Davis, co-director, Interdisciplinary Committee on Organizational Studies, University of Michigan
I was reading this paper today on trait dominance, or the ability of people who exhibit more assertiveness and competence to gain leadership status in their group. Basically, the study finds that people who act competently gain influence over others because they are perceived to be more competent by the group. The researchers also found that this perceived competence may not actually be related to their true competence.
The paper cites ways in which an individual may demonstrate competence to a group, such as their vocabulary or choice of “factual” language, their ability to speak assertively and fluidly, eye contact, and their “relaxed and expansive posture”. Individuals with a higher trait do same attributes, with the addition of suggesting and expressing their opinions more frequently.
The researchers stated: “We do not wish to argue that the core feature of personality dominance is to send a misleading signal of competence to others. Rather, trait dominance might be best defined by its primary social outcome, the establishment of influence in interpersonal settings (Gough et al., 1951; Wiggins, 1979). Individuals higher in trait dominance are perhaps defined by their striving and attainment of control and power in dyads and face-to-face groups.”
The researchers also found that “More assertive individuals might sometimes gain influence above and beyond what their actual competence warrants, and skilled members who are low in trait dominance might be unjustifiably ignored.”
They also stated that the groups may be initially wrong. “Initially, shy individuals were perceived as less intelligent by fellow group members because they spoke less; however, over time shyness was unrelated to peer ratings of intelligence, and, instead, actual intelligence predicted peer-rated intelligence.” Good news for me, I guess, but I suppose I should fake being extroverted more often.
Finally, the researchers suggested that it might be interesting to see if their finding could hold up outside of the experiment, such as what would happen if the study took place over a longer period of time, or if the groups were larger and the organization was more complex.
The study was conducted by Cameron Anderson and Gavin J. Kilduff, of UC Berkeley, and the full title is “Why Do Dominant Personalities Attain Influence In Face-to-Face Groups?: The Competence-Signaling Effects of Trait Dominance.”
Last week in our Communications Lab class, we discussed photo manipulation.
Today, a friend posted a video on her FB Wall, that really depicts the whole process – from makeup session, to photo session, to photo manipulation and print.
I really like the video, but what I don’t understand is why people constantly make the comment that a video with this type of subject matter is great for teenagers, without any mention of how this type of video may benefit all members of society. I feel insecure about my appearance as I did when I was a teenager, but perhaps I’ve lived enough to appreciate the amount of variation in the population to know that I’m not as unusual as I may think I am.
Anyway, it is a good video, so watch it. It’s good for you.
…ok, so actually, I think the advertising from Dove is clearly implied on the billboard at the end. It’s a billboard for a make-up brand called “Fasel” – aka False? – Foundation. Anyway, it’s a brand of makeup that doesn’t exist.
