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. | Baada ya miaka mengi kupita, bila ya kuleta fujo kuhusu hiyo, wenye mamlaka wa New York waliondoa vibonyezi vingi vyakudhibithi mwangaza wakuvukia barabara za wapita njia katika jiji. Waliamua kwamba, upimaji wa muda kupitia tarakalishi, kwa mara nyingi hufanya kazi vyema. Mwaka 2004, chini ya 750 ya vibonyezi hivo 3,250 zilibaki zikifanya kazi. Serikali ya jiji haiku, walakini, ondoa vibonyezi ambazo hazifanyi kazi—ambazo zinavutia vidole vingi kubonyeza bure. Mwanzoni, vibonyezi vilibaki kwa ajili ya gharama ya kuziondoa. Lakini iligunduliwa ya kwamba vibonyezi ambazo hazifanyi kazi pia zina manufaa. Wapita njia ambao hubonyeza vibonyezi sio rahisi kwao kuvuka kabla ya mtu wa kijani kutokezea, anasema Tal Oron-Gilad wa Chuo kikuu cha Ben-Gurion huko Negev, Israeli. Kwa kusoma tabia katika uvukaji, aliona ya kwamba watu hutii kwa urahisi utaratibu ambao unasemekana kufuata mchango wao. Vibonyezi ambazo hazifanyi kazi zinatoa hali sawa na madawa ya kutuliza akili kwa vile watu hupenda kujiona kuwa na uwezo wa kudhibiti mifumu wanayotumia, anasema Eytan Adar, mtaalamu wa uhusioano kati ya tarakalishi na binadamu katika chuo kikuu cha Michigan, Ann Arbor. Dkt. Adar anadokeza ya kwamba wanafunzi wake mara nyingi huunda programu yenye kibonyezo cha “hifadhi” ambacho hakina matumizi ila kufariji watumizi ambao hawajui ya kwamba uandishi unahifadhiwa kiotomatiki kivyovyote vile. Wazia jambo hili, anasema, kama kipimo cha ufadhili wa udanganyifu kupambana na ubaridi wakawaida wa dunia ya machine. Hio ni njia moja ya maoni. Lakini, katika uvukaji wa barabara angalau, vibonyezo vya matibabu ya kutiliza akili zinaweza pia kuwa na kasoro. Ralf Risser, mkuu wa FACTUM, taasisi ya Vienna ambayo inasomea hali za kisaikologia katika mifumo ya trafiki, inatambua ya kwamba wapita njia kutambua uwepo wake, na kuchukizwa na udanganyifu, sasa umezidi manufaa zake. |