Stephen Anderson gave an initial disclaimer when beginning his session, “The Art and Science of Seductive Interactions.” His background is in design, so his education in the actual ‘science’ part is minimal. He said he focuses on the art of seductive interactions, but that science does play an integral part (i.e. psychology, linguistics, neuroscience) in understanding human behavior. Anderson discussed how there are basic human characteristics that designers can tap into in order to ‘seduce’ your audience.
Anderson recommended incorporating the following attributes into your designs:
- Sensory integration-any time you appeal to more of the senses, you get more attention
- Social proof-you’re more likely to follow what others that are similar to you are doing
- Novelty-it’s new and it’s cool
- Sequencing-break it down for people (i.e. steps, phases)
- Challenges-challenge people to go to the next level
- Status-You’re cool if you complete the challenge
Anderson broke down the session through something we all understand (or try to understand): dating. He associated creating seductive design interactions with things you should do/be when you’re dating:
- Get to first base with your users > User experience: visual imagery, feedback, increasing the motivation to follow through with a product or service
- Be mysterious and intriguing
- Play hard to get
- Lighten up! (playful, fun language)
- Take a chance
- Be frisky
- Give gifts and pleasant surprises
Overall be innovative, produce quality designs and pay attention to basic human traits that will help you to be effective and successful. Whether you’re selling a product, a service, a website, whatever; you need to produce quality designs that will seduce and lure your audience.
Permalink
Being an Art major and have taken many different design classes, I think Stephen Anderson has very good insight when creating something to please people. “The Art and Science of Seductive Interactions” approach is fantastic especially reaching out to the young adult era of this day and age since everything in society seems to be connected with sex appeal. Sex really does sell, so why wouldn’t we think of this approach in artistic creations?
The way he broke down he explained his process by the example of dating was so clever, yet necessary in the aspect of ‘seductive interactions’. Anderson’s use of humor in how the dating crowd of society works such as ‘playing hard to get’ and ‘be frisky’ actually relates very well to design and how one should put focus this mind on the goal of the end result. A successful creation is unique and not easily available, but gives the owner much excitement and fun feelings when viewing. I absolutely love this and wish I could of been there to see Anderson speak myself!
Permalink
I’m married to a few websites. I check on them daily and get upset when they aren’t there late at night. And I have to admit, they seduced me in the beginning of our relationship.
The idea of relating websites to dating and seduction falls in line with what technology is becoming – more human. Anderson is right in believing that the techniques of a ladies man (or a mans lady) can transfer to the web. Yet I think great content is the only way to keep the audience coming back for more and more.
Permalink
I am going to say I completely agree. Back with the dating, everyone wants someone, or something, that they cannot have. It’s all about the challenge. Once that challenge is met, then it’s still a challenge to keep what you have and make it better. If you want to seduce the audience, you can give it all away at first, because then it will get old. With status, people are in relationships for the status. Like in 8th grade, you were the “cool couple” because you wore designers and held hands in the hall way.
You were cool because someone else said you were cool. People listen to others always. Facebook, when you type things about you it makes a link so you can click on it and find others who have the same interest. You want to be around people who like the things you like.
Permalink
I found Chris Anderson’s, “The Art and Science of Seductive Interaction,” very interesting. He is spot on with comparing social media and design (“seductive interaction”) to dating. You really do have to reach out to figure out who you want your “audience” to be or who you’re trying to attract–much like dating.
In response to what Hope said about sex selling, she’s absolutely right. And Chris Anderson was very clever to connect the “sex sells” approach to the artistic aspects of social media and interaction. It is human instinct to be drawn to the more “attractive” things, whatever they may be. We’re always drawn to the mysterious, the playful, the challenge… so you know you’ve succeeded creatively when leave your audience wanting more. His approach really caught me off guard because I’ve never even thought to think of social media and design like dating.
Permalink
Stephen Anderson has hit the nail on the head with this correlation between design and dating. I never would have thought to compare the two, but after reading this article, it seems like it’s so simple. I feel like this would have been a fun seminar to attend. I wish I could have gone!
I feel like whenever a person goes to a job interview – for whatever job he or she is looking for – he or she should keep these tips in mind. People aren’t only selling their designs or their skills; they’re selling themselves. Job hunters need to make employers realize that their company would be nothing without new and fresh ideas; and who has better ones? The people who are getting the jobs are the “mysterious and intriguing” and “frisky” job hunters. This was a great read for me personally, since I am going out into the “real world” in a mere 2 months!
Permalink
I have to say that I completely agree with this because I also am “married” to some websites that I frequently check and what not but yeah. Also I love the thing with the Social Proof and Novelty, I know a lot of people who join certain social networks, visit certain websites, or do certain things because they see people who are like them doing those things and also because it’s like the new cool thing to do.
I liked how he used the idea of comparing the design and dating because when designing something it is targeted to a certain group of people and also with playing hard to get usually just makes people want more and what not.
Permalink
I would’ve loved to see this panel. I’m a sucker for great design and will even shell out extra money for a product that has a better label.
The correlation between design and dating is almost spot on. Just like you are more likely to be interested in someone at a bar who seems to have the same style/taste as you, the design of certain products and web sites call your name. We’ve studied a lot about sensory and visual appeal in my communication design classes. Although I do agree with one of the commenters that content should be the most important factor.
Permalink
This is really interesting. Dating is really interesting. Stephen Anderson makes some really valid points about design technique. I know I like to see something that I have common ground with some flare in it. I want to see if its what I want or if its something out of my reach or ability. Being mysterious always helps. I always use my charm and irrestistable techniques.
@Jennifer Trayan, I agree. If you are looking for a job, you have to be frisky and mysterious to keep your employer wanting more. When you have your audience wanting more, you got them in your hands. Just like good dating skills.
I would have loved to see this panel too.
Permalink
I like this session. The art and science of seduction take place in our society daily whether it’s that enticing commercial that lures you to a fast food place or that sensual man that trys to get you to go on a date.
When it comes to dating I think that is something we all can relate to. The design has to be effective, pulling in the audience, capturing their attention and landing the deal, which can be successfully getting that number or going on date number one! I like how he explain this concept, it was very interesting.