Comments on: What Neuroscience Has to Say About Gap's Logo Disaster

By: Russ

Russ — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 20:41:26 +0000

How about this crazy idea: The original logo has become so familiar and iconic, that any alteration of it just screams ‘wrong’ to people?

By: Darius

Darius — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:20:38 +0000

Wow, so your saying that I can make millions of dollars just by ‘claiming’ to be a professional ‘neural science and physics marketting dummy’? I should do that. Sure beats actually working for a buck.

By: Georg

Georg — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:52:42 +0000

So,
who or what told the “GAP” people that the old logo had
to be replaced?
I know the kind of “top managers” involved.
All their behaviour tells:
“I do have more money (to spend) than brain, please help!”
Kings used to have tenured jesters, poets and painters.
Today that role is filled by certain “advisors” mostly
dealing in advertising and public relations.
Georg

By: Brian Too

Brian Too — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:21:33 +0000

We are heavily dependent upon edges and outlines for reading. There’s some research out there (don’t have a reference handy) that says we actually read words by their overall “shape” in order to increase reading and comprehension speed. When you come across an unfamiliar word you have to slow right down and sound it out, but the reader does not do this unless forced to.

Therefore when we read the new logo, the comprehension process is organized like this:

Ga…. p? Gap.

Unfortunately since the box is not a letter, it permanantly impairs the shape of the company name. The reader may eventually memorize this combination but it’s an irritant to the normal rules of reading.

By: SaCrIt: Art Science Blog

SaCrIt: Art Science Blog — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:56:14 +0000

As an outsider looking in (Australian) I find it very hard to understand just what’s gone on here. Now i understand a little… well about the science anyway.

By: Bigby

Bigby — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:27:02 +0000

Jason – the old logo is full of edges, yes, but the difference is that the identifier – GAP – is safely esconced within the edges whereas the new Gap is being visually “cut” by an edge. I agree that I’m not convinced of universal “fear” of edges, but I think that’s the difference, the position of the edges.

By: Jason Goldman

Jason Goldman — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:16:02 +0000

“We’re hardwired to avoid sharp edges because in nature they represent a threat”

I don’t know about that. We’re innately sensitive to edges, we are innately aware of edges – but are we innately fearful of edges? I don’t think so. The new logo was certainly ugly, but the old logo is full of edges.

I’m not sure we need to appeal to evolutionary psychology on this one. Zen Faulkes at NeuroDojo has an opposite take: http://neurodojo.blogspot.com/2010/10/sharp-edges-and-soft-science.html

By: Livia Blackburne

Livia Blackburne — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:04:32 +0000

Of course, now some designer will come along and make a logo with those no-nos, and it will be wildly successful.