 |
A project to make businesses more aware of their customer experience, and how to fix it. By Mark Hurst. |
| About Mark Hurst | Mark's Gel Conference | New York Times Story on This Is Broken | Newsletter: Subscribe | RSS Feed |
Search this site:
Categories:
- Advertising
- Current Affairs
- Customer Service
- Fixed
- Food and Drink
- Just for Fun
- Misc
- Not broken
- Place
- Product Design
- Signs
- Travel
- Web/Tech
Previous: (Just for fun) Cableway sign | Main | Next: Avery binder insert
August 30, 2004 12:01 AM
Broken: Backward elevator buttons
Dan Hennes writes:
This is the elevator keypad from a luxury Manhattan apartment. Can you see what's wrong? The numbers are listed right to left, instead of left to right.
He told you in the post what's wrong. Numbers listed right-to-left? That's totally non-intuitive and Broken in an English-speaking country.
I disagree that this is broken. Even though conventional "number lines" proceed left-to-right in English, we also read top-down, yet these numbers are bottom up; one could just as easily argue that that is broken. So long as the numbers are in some sort of consecutive order, I'd suggest that this is merely a different, perhaps less common convention, but not broken.
This is not backwards. Who makes the backwards rules anyway? Looks ok to a left handed Japanese person.
Its not backwards if the numbers are counting down. This would put the top floor at the top of the list, and the bottom floor at the bottom. When presenting the list in a normal manner, the buttons in the picture would be the expected result. R, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, etc. Or, when arranged into 3 colums:
R 20 19
18 17 16
etc.
The numbers would only increas from left to right if you started with the smallest number at the top, and counted upwards, but this would be counter intuitive in the eleveator, because it would list the top floor at the bottom. LL, L, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.
As noted previously, 13 is rarely used, and the lobby and lower lobby normally replace their respective floors.
Not broken. The button arrangment follows a set of widely held conventions in a predictable manner.
Bubba,
But Manhattan is a right-handed (mostly) American city. Not even close to Japan. Very few Japanese-Americans even.
It's broken, but not by too much. It should count down in American reading format.
30-29-28
27-26-25...
You're all right about counting *down* in the correct sequence, but unless you typically fly to work in a private helicopter, you enter and exit from the ground floor, therefore you mentally "start" at the lowest floor number when searching for a button to push. This is why it confused Dan Hennes, though maybe it's not 100% "broken".
I think this is not broken: my theory is that the building is not a 22+ story high-rise at all, but one of those new "inverted" buildings that actually goes down into the ground. Therefore, "R" means ground level, then 22 is the first level underground, all the way down to the Lower Lobby which is waaaaay down, nearly 220 feet down.
But, if my theory is wrong, then this keypad is definitely...broken.
Not broken. Almost every elevator I've been in has the button layout in decending order, from top to bottom, like the building's floors are numbered in decending order from top to bottom. But since it would be crazy (especially in a skyscraper or other tall building) to have the buttons like this, using one column:
8---
7---
6---
usually it is arranged like this:
6---7---8---
3---4---5---
B---1---2---
where someone can mentally put it together into one strip or like this:
2---5---8---
1---4---7---
B---3---6---
where the person could treat it as one column
Evidently the owner of the building didn't like numbers being read off "6,7,8,3,4,5,B,1,2" or "2,5,8,1,4,7,B,3,6"
This format retains this "building-layout" format in a friendlier format, the numbers can be ordered by stacking or decending order. Pretty smart if you ask me.
Matthew, with all due respect, your argument doesn't hold water for one simple reason: it assumes that the elevator rider is going to always start counting from the top down. In fact, I'll wager that most users start from the bottom up, especially if they've just held the "door open" button for a second to let other passengers on, or if they've just hit the "door close" button to close the door. In this case, it makes sense to then begin looking "up" the keyboard for your floor. With this simple premise, starting to look from right to left, in a Western city, is ridiculous.
It surprises me how many people don't see this as broken. So, in short, I suggest someone do some user testing and see which elevator keyboard is easier to user, easier to use being judged by the time it takes a passenger to find their floor's button and hit it. I'd bet the traditional, bottom to top, left to right format wins most times.
If this is not broken, then the numeric on my keyboard must be broken, as it still reads left to right despite 0 being at the bottom.
I share Mac's surprise at the number of posters who don't see this as broken. Yes, it's a logical arrangement in the sense that there is a pattern to it -- but if you put all the prime numbers in one column and the non-prime in another, that would be a pattern, too.
I think the confusion actually arises from a number of causes: the three-column arrangement is probably difficult even if the numbers go left-to-right as suggested (I think two columns would be better); there is no obvious starting point for the floor numbers, both because of the physical layout of the buttons and the lack of "1" and especially "2"; and the bland sameness of all those white circles -- I'll bet wrong floors are hit all the time, and more than once someone has rung the alarm when they just meant to keep the door open.
It may not seem like a big deal, but I've encountered elevator panels arranged like this in several hotels, and I can vouch from personal experience that it is frustrating (and not a little embarassing) to spend several seconds staring at an elevator panel trying to figure out what button to push. And it's not just me; I've shared such elevators with people who have actually had to ask for help!
The panel is counterintuitive until one factor is taken into account - spatial context. Whether or not it is broken depends on the location of the elevator door. If the door opening is just left of the panel, then a numbering sequence reading from right to left actually becomes quite natural. It speaks of the symmetrical condition. (In an elevator where the door is located in the very center of one wall, correlating the center of symmetry with 'beginning' is a common analogue.)
The location of the Lower Level button at first seems odd (according to the chosen numbering system it should be located directly left of where it is currently), until the actuality of its use is considered. The Door Open and Door Close buttons have very similar icons, so separating them is appropriate, considering the distinction that can be drawn between floors located above or below grade (Lower Level's underground, so all bets are off).
As for numbering an elevator with the lower floors beginning at the bottom, it simply corresponds to the location of said floors in space, with the roof being the top.
The panel is counterintuitive until one factor is taken into account - spatial context. Whether or not it is broken depends on the location of the elevator door. If the door opening is just left of the panel, then a numbering sequence reading from right to left actually becomes quite natural. It speaks of the symmetrical condition. (In an elevator where the door is located in the very center of one wall, correlating the center of symmetry with 'beginning' is a common analogue.)
The location of the Lower Level button at first seems odd (according to the chosen numbering system it should be located directly left of where it is currently), until the actuality of its use is considered. The Door Open and Door Close buttons have very similar icons, so separating them is appropriate, considering the distinction that can be drawn between floors located above or below grade (Lower Level's underground, so all bets are off).
As for numbering an elevator with the lower floors beginning at the bottom, it simply corresponds to the location of said floors in space, with the roof being the top.
SB, at first your argument makes sense, but this is one of those many instances where the most commonly understood convention should take precedent over a less commonly understood convention. I.e., reading numbers sequentially from left to right is a more common convention than looking from right to left on a left-side elevator keyboard panel. This convention you suggest is highly inconvenient in a world where telephone kepads, calculators, and nearly every other numeric keypad starts with lower numbers on the left.
When people look at this panel, I doubt they "scan" from right to left. I'd wager that, as in any situation where a Western reader is looking for information, their eyes will first "jump" to the left side of the panel expecting to see Floor 1 or Lobby. When they do so, they are going to see Floor 4, and then the confusion begins.
Also, if your analogy were true, then a billboard on the left side of the road should really have text that begins on the right side...since a driver would begin looking at the part of the billboard closest to them. Again, this is not the case...readers' eyes will jump to where they think the information should logically begin.
Again, I am surprised by the number of posters willing to defend this system because they think it is "clever" or "smart." Clever or smart should always lose the battle to "usable."
Broken.
This is a quite interesting thread.
I think this is broken too. It's just a common logic to scan numbers and letters from left to right (for all the languages which use the latin letters). In maths, one of the first things you learn is the "number line". And there, the numbers advance from left to right. When you first get to learn the alphabet, the letters advance from left to right too. So, for most people, this is the pattern they scan anything written, from left to right. It doesn't matter if the door is to the left or right of the panel.
The argument that numbers should begin from top is just RIDICULOUS! I have never, EVER seen an elevator with numbers starting from the top. Most of the building I've been in and out have 5-8 floors (therefore single row of numbers on the panel) and they don't go like
1
2
3
4...
they (of course) go
4
3
2
1...
Numbers beginning from top could only happen if the buildings were built into the earth, like Michael McWatters so beautifully wrote. :)
When you enter the building, you're on the lowest floor. It's only natural to "look your way up" from the bottom.
Does anybody know if the image on this panel was on the left or right side of the lift? It seems to me that when you are inside an elevator the numbers may be reversed depending upon what side of the door the panel is placed. Lower numbers closer to the door. My vote, this is not broken.
I concur that this is broken.
There is another usage problem that I have observed with this type of elevator keypad. I've often seen people press on the embossed number instead of the white button. In fact, I've done this myself on a number of occasions.
I'd agree that it is broken. In America, we read from left to right, regardless of handedness. Let's take a look at the 2 most common row and column arrangements of numbers that we Americans look at:
Computer/adding machine keypad:
7 8 9
4 5 6
1 2 3
A telephone keypad:
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
Regardless of lowest on top or lowest on bottom, we are used to reading left to right... and seeing numbers from lowest to highest when scanning from left to right.
As Selcuk pointed out, it is absolutely logical and conventional to have elevator buttons vertically stacked with the highest number at the top and lowest at the bottom. This naturally maps to the physical configuration of the building, and anyone who claims otherwise has simply not been paying attention (which further attests to how naturaly the mapping is -- you haven't even needed to notice it).
The reason that this situation has become somewhat complicated is that there are too many buttons to place in one column. Then the question becomes whether they should run left to right in ascending or descending order. I think I would have had them ascend left to right, however, the solution they chose does have the logical that you get a linear sequence when you read left to right (20, 19, 18, 17).
Is this broken? I don't think that there is a perfect solution. Like I said, I think I would have taken the other less-than-ideal solution.
While everyone is debating if this is really broken or not, there is a second elevator in the same building and that number pad is the opposite of this format (left to right rather than right to left). So if this one isn't broken, the other one is ;-)
If an elevator panel (or any other interface) causes this much confusion and subsequent analysis, then I would say it is broken.
:-)
I find this neither unclear nor confusing. If this is to the left of the door, it feels absolutely right to me. If on the right, less so. Either way, calling it broken seems a stretch. Is anyone going to end up on the wrong floor, or even be delayed for more than half a second because of the layout?
In response to Mark, it is broken if it confuses people, and there is a simple alternative that is easier to use. As you point out, people may not end up on the wrong floor, but choosing their button is a hassle. Will they be delayed for more than half a second? I bet so. In fact, I'd be people who expect the numbers to run logically from left to right might spend 2-3 seconds looking for their floor. In the high-rise building I work in, when 5-15 people get on an elevator at a time, and all of them are jabbing at the buttons trying to find their floor, this is a problem...and broken.
ITS BROKEN!! AHHH WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING AS TO PUT THE NUMBERS IN THE WRONG ORDER?! I THINK I MAY DIE!!!....not really, and who really cares what order u can still read em cant yall?
Couldn't you just look for the number you're looking to push? I must admit, at first glance the panel is disorienting, but to me its just the bottom portion... where the door open/close buttons, etc. are... other than that I'd just scan the panel, most likely the left or right column to get close to my floor then push the correct button. See... broken, but with a workaround... kinda like Microsoft products :D.
Why can't they just have a keypad for entering the floors? (wait...... how are we going to arrange the keypad numbers?)
catch-22!
I think it's hillarious that they've put the keypads different ways round in the two lifts (as mentioned by Dan Hennes at September 2, 2004 02:32 PM). They've really tried to think about this one ... and yet here it is on "this is broken"!
At least it would make usability testing easier: just put a camera in each lift and see which one proved easier to use ;-)
it was left to right all right, when the tech installed the keys from the other side of the panel ;D
Mac: What no one has yet done is show that most people, or even a significant number of them, are confused by the layout. Once this is done, there is, as you note, the next step still to be taken: show that there is an alternative that does not have the problem. All we have so far is a few people with ideas of why, in theory, it's non-intuitive. Let the user tests begin.
I don't find this to be broken; just non-standard. So, if it were left to right, starting from the top, you might intuitively know that the 4th row down, 2nd from the left is where you are going? You still need to look, unless you have above-average spacial abilities.
Not broken. Not standard, might make you take a whole 37 milliseconds longer to realize where your floor is, but certainly not broken.
Personally, if I were living in a Luxary Manhatten building, I think I could find more important things to distract my thoughts with. MMMmm.... maybe not- maybe that's why I don't think it's broken?!?
To Duh: if it's as easy to fix as simply putting the numbers in, ahem, order, why not do so? The extra 37 milliseconds, multiplied by thousands of passengers a year, is still a waste of time when a simpler, more standard keypad would do a better job. Why confuse riders, even if it's just for 37 milliseconds?
For Mark, user testing would be overkill in this instance: over half the posters here think it's broken. Everyone I've showed the graphic to found it confusing. User testing is best applied when there is a tough call to be made but, when something is obviously non-standard, illogical and confusing to over half your audience, you should go back to the drawing board.
Holy cow,
I'm so suprised at how many people will say something is not broken just to look down on other people who think it is broken. Snobs. What button is pressed most often???????????????
Americans With Disabilities Act Which is a FEDERAL LAW not a suggestion requires the elevator buttons to be installed from left to right.
407.4.6.2 Buttons. Car control buttons with floor designations shall comply with 407.4.6.2 and shall be raised or flush.EXCEPTION: In existing elevators, buttons shall be permitted to be recessed.407.4.6.2.1 Size. Buttons shall be 3/4 inch (19 mm) minimum in their smallest dimension.407.4.6.2.2 Arrangement. Buttons shall be arranged with numbers in ascending order. When two or more columns of buttons are provided they shall read from left to right.
That's so COOL! Can we have a law that forces everything to be usable too? And one that makes people use apostrophes correctly? And keeps carbonated drinks out of vending machines that drop them from a height? And...
I agree with Don about the Americans With Disabilities Act. If this panel is confusing to us normal people, think how confused the seeing impaired person would be. Standardization makes life for much easier.
it just dawned on me why 13 is commonly left off buildings. The number 13 and especially friday the 13th are 'unlucky' because the nights templar were rounded up and murdered on friday the 13th back in the 1200 or 1300's or so. The freemasons claim that they are decended from the knights templar, and thus 13 is a very unlucky number to them. Freemasons are into that whole making buildings thing... so there you go. A conspiracy!
I think it's broken. It took me a long time to realize that the numbers wern't just in a random order.
Comments on this entry are closed
Previous: (Just for fun) Cableway sign | Main | Next: Avery binder insert
It's missing the numbers 13,2,and one.
Posted by: Billy Bob at August 30, 2004 12:31 AM