I recently finished reading 100 More Things Every Designer Should Know About People by Susan Weinschenk, and honestly, it turned out to be one of the most fascinating design books I’ve read in a while. It’s very simple on the surface, just “facts about people”, but so many of them made me stop and think about how much design actually influences us and how little we understand about the way humans perceive the world.
The book covers everything from how to make people pay attention to specific parts of a design, to what makes people buy things, to how different colors and styles work differently for different genders. But the parts that surprised me the most were the ones about human perception.
For example, I had no idea that some women are tetrachromats, meaning they have four cones in their eyes instead of three. They literally see more colors than most people, but they don’t even know it, because the entire world is designed for “normal” vision. This idea blew my mind a bit. It made me think about how much design assumes an “average user” who doesn’t really exist.
Another thing that shocked me was the fact that movement improves memory. I always thought you had to sit still and concentrate to learn something. But apparently if you walk around or move while learning, you actually remember better. This really made me reflect on museums and how often they expect visitors to stand still, read, stare—and then somehow magically absorb information. Maybe movement should be part of learning.
One thing that made me genuinely happy was the chapter about daydreaming. According to the book, mind wandering is actually very important for creativity. I always noticed that I come up with better ideas when I’m just staring at a wall, spacing out, not forcing myself to think. I thought it was just me being weird or unproductive. But it turns out this is how our brain forms new connections. So now I feel like my way of thinking isn’t wrong—it’s actually useful.
But the part that really grabbed my attention more than everything else was fact number 100. It was about how our brain processes sensory information unconsciously, and that it doesn’t really care where the information comes from. The example was David Eagleman’s “vest” that sends vibration patterns to the body. After some time, without special training, people could understand what the vibrations meant. So the vest basically created a new sense.
This idea amazed me. That we can literally create new senses. That the brain is ready to learn new types of information if we just feed it signals in a consistent way.
It feels almost like science fiction, and I can’t believe this was already happening ten years ago. I haven’t heard much about this vest since then, which is strange, because to me this opens so many possibilities.
For my master thesis, I’m working with interactive technologies in art and museums, and this idea of creating new senses suddenly feels extremely relevant. If the brain doesn’t care where information comes from, then why should art experiences be limited to audio guides and screens?
If people can “learn” a new sense simply through exposure, then maybe museums could help visitors experience art in more immersive and emotional ways. Not just by showing more information, but by expanding perception.
AI was used for corrections, better wording, and enhancements.
