ACM Interactions

Recently, Apple has been taken to task for its apparent hyperdevotion to skeuomorphism. Faux leather visual design, faux bookshelves, faux notepads—these artifacts of design become objet de derision in today's history- and human factors-weak design community. Combine this weakness with a rush to production under big-A Agile, and we run amok with undesigned designs.

Yes, some elements of Apple's design may have famously taken some aspects of skeuomorphism too far. The stitch effect on the iPad's iCal app, the wood grain look of a physical bookshelf straight out of a Barnes & Noble in Evanston or Ottumwa, and the "trailers" in iMovie to create fake previews all push metaphor too far. 

Yet false dichotomies play into this world as well. Why do we hear of approaches that completely eliminate skeuomorphism, as opposed to ones that refer to the models that people come to an experience with? 

I first read the term mental model in Donald Norman's The Design of Everyday Things when I bought a copy from the B&N in Evanston in 1995. In it, he describes mental models as "conceptual models of the way objects work, events take place, or people behave." In her book Mental Models: Aligning Design Strategy with Human Behavior, Indi Young says, "Mental models give you a deep understanding of people’s motivations and thought-processes, along with the emotional and philosophical landscape in which they are operating.”

Both of these definitions resonate strongly with me, and they ground themselves in a human approach to design. Key to me is the mapping from a user's mental model to a designer's conceptual model of an experience artifact (that is, the thing that is designed to evoke/evince/enable a person to experience...something. I'll shorthand it to "an experience."). When we create something, we need to keep that person's mental model foremost in our design flow, for we walk on thin cognitive ice when we deviate too radically from that model.

Herein lies the usefulness of skeuomorphic conceptual models. By mapping to these expected models, we designers can reduce cognitive friction that can occur when users' mental models and designers' conceptual models don't match. Seeing something that maps to a familiar real-world interaction can help users successfully meet their goals.

I know that, for most of us, these concepts are extremely basic. Yet I'm concerned that either we're forgetting them or we're intentionally mass-masking them in favor of the UX flavor of the month.

Metaphor still resonates at a deep, human level. Some level of design mapping to human mental models makes sense—design sense. So while restraint in pixelating stitches might be in order, keep skeuomorphism in your toolkit of good design techniques.

Joe Sokohl