How statistics can move us: Not very many people have good “translators” to transform left-brain information like words, statistics and factual data into the right-brain format of imagery, which triggers emotions. We question our ethics when we realize that “one death is a tragedy, one million deaths is a statistic.” but, to me, this is a design challenge, we simply have not communicated effectively to the right half of the brain. I learned to do this on myself, and it allows me to do really neat things like change my emotional reactions so that I respond differently to deliberate improvements that I make to my ideas. You cannot simply make a person emotional and present them with a statistic. That’s a non sequitur to the right brain. You need to communicate the statistic using specific visualizations.
This is the type of imagery I’m thinking might work: Tell the story of Rokia while showing her face, and then zoom out. Imagine one of those Final Fantasy cut scenes that’s totally seamless, to keep them connected to their feelings about Rokia while the scope increases. You zoom out to show her village. A village is a lot to visually process, so the designer would make a few scenes stand out that people consciously notice and process, and recognize that each person repeats the feeling of Rokia. So, you notice a crying family of people, disabled child struggling, and a kid hugging an extremely skinny dog. This carries the emotional impact of hearing about Rokia and repeats it a few times within that larger scope. Then you zoom out further till you can see the city glowing in unhappy “emergency zone” red graphic effects. (It would work best to show these earlier, at intense emotional points, so that by the time we’re zooming out, the person is conditioned to associate that graphic effect with an “emergency zone” feeling). Then zoom out further to see even more villages glowing in “emergency zone” red, until you have one of those incredible scenes that gives you a sense of awe (like when Harry Potter is flying on his broomstick and the scenery is incredibly detailed, except it’s filled with all these emergency zones.) And then, to bring it all together again, and ensure that this macrocosm is merged with the microcosm of Rokia, bubbles could pop out of each of those zones showing more unhappy scenes—one at a time at first so that you get the gist of what’s in the bubbles—and then more and more rapidly to show this really, really numerous amount of them representing “millions”. Or, you could try literally showing millions of them—the subconscious brain is supposed to be able to process all that. Then the screen stays filled with them for a moment so you can take it all in, and whatever realizations can bubble up from the subconscious into the conscious.
THAT might communicate the scope of the problem to the right side of the brain.
That sort of intensive, macrocosm-detailing visual communication is what the right brain needs in order to hear “millions of Rokias”.
This type of visualization would obviously create a lot of stress—stress is power and this power can be really bad, or it can be really good. So, I answered the question: Would the stress be constructive?
Interesting idea, although you risk triggering associations like the “final fantasy” one you mention above that would switch people’s serious reactions off. You’re also going to hit saturation very soon I think. Somebody needs to do this and draw the curves, figure out how much room there is for sadness in the human mind.
Sadness Engineering. I think I’ve had an idea for a startup.
Do you think people notice cut scenes like that? Back before I learned anything about graphic design, I didn’t notice the techniques they were using—what I noticed were the images they presented to me in the visual foreground. I don’t think people will get distracted by the technique or associate it with entertainment. I think most wouldn’t notice it. But that’s an interesting point—to wonder how many people would notice that and how many wouldn’t.
Even if that is the case, a really good designer could make it their task to re-frame the technique of seamless cut-scenes such that they look serious or don’t distract you from the serious context. For instance, adding a shaky helicopter ride in that’s so wobbly, you automatically assume it’s real.
A clever designer could get around minor presentation challenges like these, I feel.
It would take a brilliant designer to do it well, not to mention the influence of a person with excellent leadership skills contributing their vision for how to transform the stress into purpose, and someone who knows a lot about psychology and visual communication to analyze how to pull off the effect correctly. I have no objection to assisting with making such a project successful, by contributing my understanding of psychology and design, but I have next to no experience doing video and animation. I have projects of my own that take priority due to being pre-existing, so if you or someone you know wants to lead this, go for it.
Good one, Nancy. But we might all be more purpose-oriented. It could change us on the inside, if it worked. Even if the appeals looked the same, if people put more toward charity, the result would still be an increase in charitable behavior.
Intense stress can be constructive. You’re totally right that people will not have any idea how to deal with it. This could be either very good or very bad for the charity presenting intensely distressing imagery like what I think is needed to get people to react emotionally to statistics. If you present yourself as the solution to all of this, the guide who makes those feelings constructive, that could be very good. If the people can’t handle the stress, they’ll shut off. If you ASSIST them with handling stress, you will be seen as a leader in a hard situation, a source of comfort that gives a constructive outlet to emotion, meaning to pain. The difference could be this:
You see a crying child, you’re a little sad, you give her 20 bucks.
You see a dying country, you are moved to act now, suddenly life has purpose, you experience a renewed sense of meaning.
It would have to be done very, very carefully to have the most constructive effect. Then again, what doesn’t?
How statistics can move us: Not very many people have good “translators” to transform left-brain information like words, statistics and factual data into the right-brain format of imagery, which triggers emotions. We question our ethics when we realize that “one death is a tragedy, one million deaths is a statistic.” but, to me, this is a design challenge, we simply have not communicated effectively to the right half of the brain. I learned to do this on myself, and it allows me to do really neat things like change my emotional reactions so that I respond differently to deliberate improvements that I make to my ideas. You cannot simply make a person emotional and present them with a statistic. That’s a non sequitur to the right brain. You need to communicate the statistic using specific visualizations.
This is the type of imagery I’m thinking might work: Tell the story of Rokia while showing her face, and then zoom out. Imagine one of those Final Fantasy cut scenes that’s totally seamless, to keep them connected to their feelings about Rokia while the scope increases. You zoom out to show her village. A village is a lot to visually process, so the designer would make a few scenes stand out that people consciously notice and process, and recognize that each person repeats the feeling of Rokia. So, you notice a crying family of people, disabled child struggling, and a kid hugging an extremely skinny dog. This carries the emotional impact of hearing about Rokia and repeats it a few times within that larger scope. Then you zoom out further till you can see the city glowing in unhappy “emergency zone” red graphic effects. (It would work best to show these earlier, at intense emotional points, so that by the time we’re zooming out, the person is conditioned to associate that graphic effect with an “emergency zone” feeling). Then zoom out further to see even more villages glowing in “emergency zone” red, until you have one of those incredible scenes that gives you a sense of awe (like when Harry Potter is flying on his broomstick and the scenery is incredibly detailed, except it’s filled with all these emergency zones.) And then, to bring it all together again, and ensure that this macrocosm is merged with the microcosm of Rokia, bubbles could pop out of each of those zones showing more unhappy scenes—one at a time at first so that you get the gist of what’s in the bubbles—and then more and more rapidly to show this really, really numerous amount of them representing “millions”. Or, you could try literally showing millions of them—the subconscious brain is supposed to be able to process all that. Then the screen stays filled with them for a moment so you can take it all in, and whatever realizations can bubble up from the subconscious into the conscious.
THAT might communicate the scope of the problem to the right side of the brain.
That sort of intensive, macrocosm-detailing visual communication is what the right brain needs in order to hear “millions of Rokias”.
This type of visualization would obviously create a lot of stress—stress is power and this power can be really bad, or it can be really good. So, I answered the question: Would the stress be constructive?
Interesting idea, although you risk triggering associations like the “final fantasy” one you mention above that would switch people’s serious reactions off. You’re also going to hit saturation very soon I think. Somebody needs to do this and draw the curves, figure out how much room there is for sadness in the human mind.
Sadness Engineering. I think I’ve had an idea for a startup.
I’m essentially working on this. Anyone who intends to be working on it seriously, PM me.
Do you think people notice cut scenes like that? Back before I learned anything about graphic design, I didn’t notice the techniques they were using—what I noticed were the images they presented to me in the visual foreground. I don’t think people will get distracted by the technique or associate it with entertainment. I think most wouldn’t notice it. But that’s an interesting point—to wonder how many people would notice that and how many wouldn’t.
Even if that is the case, a really good designer could make it their task to re-frame the technique of seamless cut-scenes such that they look serious or don’t distract you from the serious context. For instance, adding a shaky helicopter ride in that’s so wobbly, you automatically assume it’s real.
A clever designer could get around minor presentation challenges like these, I feel.
Shouldn’t be hard to get this done. Kickstarter? Or even a philanthropic graphic designer?
It would take a brilliant designer to do it well, not to mention the influence of a person with excellent leadership skills contributing their vision for how to transform the stress into purpose, and someone who knows a lot about psychology and visual communication to analyze how to pull off the effect correctly. I have no objection to assisting with making such a project successful, by contributing my understanding of psychology and design, but I have next to no experience doing video and animation. I have projects of my own that take priority due to being pre-existing, so if you or someone you know wants to lead this, go for it.
The harder challenge would be a little later—if it works, all charitable appeals will look the same.
Good one, Nancy. But we might all be more purpose-oriented. It could change us on the inside, if it worked. Even if the appeals looked the same, if people put more toward charity, the result would still be an increase in charitable behavior.
Intense stress can be constructive. You’re totally right that people will not have any idea how to deal with it. This could be either very good or very bad for the charity presenting intensely distressing imagery like what I think is needed to get people to react emotionally to statistics. If you present yourself as the solution to all of this, the guide who makes those feelings constructive, that could be very good. If the people can’t handle the stress, they’ll shut off. If you ASSIST them with handling stress, you will be seen as a leader in a hard situation, a source of comfort that gives a constructive outlet to emotion, meaning to pain. The difference could be this:
You see a crying child, you’re a little sad, you give her 20 bucks.
You see a dying country, you are moved to act now, suddenly life has purpose, you experience a renewed sense of meaning.
It would have to be done very, very carefully to have the most constructive effect. Then again, what doesn’t?