I am reading Henry Petroski's Invention by Design, an interesting little book about how engineering and invention have been applied to solve such every day engineering problems as clipping papers together, storing carbonated beverages in retail-friendly containers, and crossing bodies of water.
In a sidebar, Petroski notes that telephone keypads and calculator keypads have evolved opposite standards when it comes to key ordering:
Telephone Calculator
1 2 3 7 8 9
4 5 6 4 5 6
7 8 9 1 2 3
* 0 # 0 + =
(I hope my attempt at monospace formatting works here.) In telephones, "1" is at the top left and the numerals proceed across and down to "9" on the bottom right, whereas in calculators, "1" is at the bottom left and "9" the top right. I have been a regular user of both telephones and calculators for something like 30 years (though concededly, of telephones having keypads for perhaps only 20 years), and I have never once noticed this disparity of standard.
Petroski asks, "Do users who alternate frequently between telephones and calculators find the difference to be a serious problem?" From my own experience, I have to say no, patently not. How is that possible? I have no idea what the answer is but I suspect there is a psychological explanation. There must be a separation in the brain's task space between the act of punching in a telephone number on the one hand, and that of entering numbers for calculation on the other, a separation sufficient that when turning one's attention to one of the two tasks one isn't even momentarily confused by expectations associated with the other. Or something.
I am amazed that I never noticed this myself and I'll have to give some thought to why that is.
Strongly recommend you read "The Design of Everyday Things" - an epic book and compulsory reading on human interface design - if you find this sort of stuff fascination (which I do).
Posted by: Maajhi | August 30, 2007 at 11:34 AM
An example the book talks about is how the design and look of door handles gives subtle and subconscious clues to the user as to how the door should be opened. Fascinating stuff.
Posted by: Maajhi | August 30, 2007 at 11:36 AM
I have noticed this, but I've never been confused by it.
Posted by: goofy | August 30, 2007 at 01:57 PM
hey, found you via Amit. I have never noticed the discrepancy either. I guess for me the explanation would be that when I punch in phone numbers, I'm not thinking of the digits, I'm usually thinking of the physical sequence of keystrokes ("up, down, left," etc). But I guess that only explains the way my brain works for entering frequently-dialed numbers, so nevermind...
Posted by: Emily | September 30, 2007 at 02:05 AM
I use a calculator constantly, and I have to make a conscious effort to remember that the phone keypad is turned around. I understand that the phone company made the numbers go the other way on purpose.
Posted by: another Emily | October 06, 2007 at 07:15 PM
I noticed this, and continually struggle with the placement differences of the keys. I am a visual-rememberer and so when I enter a PIN number or something, it helps me a lot to watch the pattern my fingers make pressing the keypad. It's a big bummer, but I try to cope :)
BTW, love the kitchen - looks fab!
Posted by: Sally Big Woods | October 08, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Just came across your blogs. Sounds like we have a lot in common. Anyway, I'm taking a break from my studdies and dabbling in one of my favorite topics of bollywood, and that's how I came across this blog.
anyway to stay on the topic, one of the ways of my nerdyness is computers. I am on the computer so frequently that when I go to use the phone I get the keypad mixed up and dial wrong numbers. Happens more if I am tired, stressed, in a hurry, etc...
I can remember one time trying to make a call and having to call 10x just to get the correct number. Partly d/t the keypad issue and partly d/t the PITA area codes (there are several in the city I live in).
back to studying, and packing to move.
~A
Posted by: bollynerd | January 12, 2008 at 03:31 AM
Has a blind person ever answered this question ?
Seems to me that they would have a lot of trouble.
Posted by: Norman Neate | October 11, 2009 at 04:44 AM