Over the course of many years, without making any great fuss about it, the authorities in New York disabled most of the control buttons that once operated pedestrian-crossing lights in the city. Computerised timers, they had decided, almost always worked better. By 2004, fewer than 750 of 3,250 such buttons remained functional. The city government did not, however, take the disabled buttons away—beckoning countless fingers to futile pressing.
Initially, the buttons survived because of the cost of removing them. But it turned out that even inoperative buttons serve a purpose. Pedestrians who press a button are less likely to cross before the green man appears, says Tal Oron-Gilad of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, in Israel. Having studied behaviour at crossings, she notes that people more readily obey a system which purports to heed their input.
Inoperative buttons produce placebo effects of this sort because people like an impression of control over systems they are using, says Eytan Adar, an expert on human-computer interaction at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Dr Adar notes that his students commonly design software with a clickable “save” button that has no role other than to reassure those users who are unaware that their keystrokes are saved automatically anyway. Think of it, he says, as a touch of benevolent deception to counter the inherent coldness of the machine world.
That is one view. But, at road crossings at least, placebo buttons may also have a darker side. Ralf Risser, head of FACTUM, a Viennese institute that studies psychological factors in traffic systems, reckons that pedestrians’ awareness of their existence, and consequent resentment at the deception, now outweighs the benefits. | Katika muda wa miaka mingi, bila kujalishwa sana na hatua waliyoichukua, mamlaka katika jiji la New York lililemaza vitufe vingi ambavyo wakati fulani vilitumiwa kudhibiti taa za kusimamisha magari ili watembeaji miguu waweza kuvuka barabara jijini. Waliamua kuwa vifaa vya kuweka muda vya kompyuta ndivyo vilivyofanya kazi vyema zaidi takribani nyakati zote. Kufikia 2004, vitufe chini ya 750 kati ya 3,250 vilivyokuwepo ndivyo vilivyokuwa vikifanya kazi. Serikali ya jiji hata hivyo haikuondoa vitufe vilivyokuwa vimelemazwa hivyo basi watu wengi waliendelea kuvibonyeza hata kama hawakuona tofauti yoyote. Mwanzoni, vitufe hivi viliendelea kuwepo kwa kuwa kulikuwa na gharama ya kuviondoa. Lakini ilitokea kwamba hata vitufe ambavyo havikufanya kazi vinaweza kufaa kwa madhumuni fulani. Watembeaji miguu ambao hubonyeza kitufe wana uwezekano mdogo wa kuvuka barabara kabla ya ishara ya kijani kibichi kutokea, kama anavyosema Tal Oron-Gilad wa Chuo Kikuu cha Ben-Gurion kilicho Negev, Israel. Kutokana na masomo yake ya mienendo ya binadamu, anasema kuwa watu huwa tayari kutii mfumo ambao huonekana kukubali walichouamrisha kufanya. Eytan Adar, mtaalamu wa maswala yanayohusiana na namna watu wanavyotumia kompyuta anasema kwamba vitufe ambavyo havifanyi kazi huwa na athari kama hizi za kipozauongo kwa kuwa watu hupenda kuhisi kuwa wana udhibiti wa mifumo wanayoitumia Dkt. Adar anasema kuwa wanafunzi wake mara nyingi huunda programu zilizo na kitufe cha “hifadhi” ambacho hakina kazi yoyote isipokuwa kuwahakikishia watumiaji ambao hata hawajui kwamba waliyoyacharaza huhifadhiwa kiotomatiki hata wasipoyahifadhi wenyewe. Hebu tafakali, anasema kwamba mbofyo huu wa kudanganya watu ni mzuri kwa wanadamu ambao wameshazoea kufanya kazi na mashine. Huo ni mtazamo mmoja. Lakini aghalabu katika vivukio vya barabara, vitufe vya kipozauongo vinaweza pia kuwa na athari hasi. Ralf Risser, mkuu wa FACTUM, ambayo ni taasisi iliyoko Vienna ijishughulishayo na utafiti wa maswala ya kisaikolojia katika mifumo ya trafiki, anasema kwamba utambuzi wa watembeaji miguu kuwa vitufe hivi vipo, na maudhi yatokanayo na vitufe hivyo kuwadanganya, sasa ni zaidi ya manufaa yake. |