From Behaviour to Perception
As my thinking shifted from encouraging children to eat vegetables to helping them rediscover vegetables, I also began exploring how this idea could be translated visually. I was interested in representing the way vegetables are often only partially understood. Rather than showing vegetables as clear and familiar objects, I experimented with visual languages that suggested uncertainty, abstraction, and gradual discovery.
Blur Pixelation Fragmentation
Start the Visual Experiment
After collecting visual references, I began experimenting with different ways of representing vegetables. Rather than creating realistic illustrations, I wanted to explore whether graphic language could express the idea that our understanding of vegetables is often incomplete, simplified, or shaped by assumptions.
Although these experiments helped me develop an abstract visual language, I gradually realised that they focused more on how vegetables are visually recognised than on how children actually experience them. As I reflected on my project, I became more interested in creating opportunities for direct interaction and sensory exploration rather than representing uncertainty through visual effects alone.
Looking back, these experiments represented an important step in my process. They helped me realise that my project should focus less on visual abstraction and more on creating new ways for children to actively discover vegetables.
I don't mean to say that “vegetables are vague.” I want my child to develop a new appreciation for vegetables.
After a series of visual experiments, I realised that I had become too focused on exploring graphic styles rather than addressing the core question of the project. Although these experiments helped me test different visual languages, they did not bring me any closer to understanding how children could genuinely reconnect with vegetables.
I also found myself repeatedly questioning what "designing for children" actually meant. It was becoming clear that simply creating an appealing visual style was not enough. I needed to find a more meaningful point of connection between children and vegetables.
A New Attempt
This reflection led me to shift my thinking once again. Instead of beginning with how vegetables look, I started thinking about how children experience food. I noticed that many children's favourite snacks are appreciated for their distinctive textures and sensory qualities—crispy, chewy, crunchy, soft, or popping. This made me wonder whether vegetables could also be introduced through familiar sensory experiences rather than their nutritional value or appearance.
I experimented with combining the visual characteristics of vegetables with the texture and shape of potato chips. Rather than changing the vegetables themselves, I was interested in translating the enjoyable experience associated with snacks into a new way of perceiving vegetables. These experiments explored whether familiar sensory associations could make vegetables feel more approachable.It relies on another food to explain vegetables.
I realised that this idea depended too heavily on snacks to make vegetables appealing.
Rather than helping children appreciate vegetables for what they are, I was asking them to understand vegetables through something else.
It assumes all children like the same snacks.
I also questioned whether this assumption was too simplistic. Not every child enjoys potato chips or the same kinds of snacks, so using snacks as a universal reference point could exclude different experiences and preferences.
The relationship became forced.
The concept gradually became a visual matching exercise rather than addressing the original research question.
Review First question: Why not just eat potato chips?
This is a matter of design logic.
The project was originally intended to convey that vegetables can have a fun texture, just like snacks. But children might interpret it as: Since potato chips taste better, why should I choose vegetables?
This puts vegetables in a comparison where they can hardly win.
Will children really understand this substitution?
For example:
Broccoli = potato chips?
Carrots = corn chips?
Celery = pretzels?
Adults, in fact, can understand that this is a “metaphor.”
But children might simply wonder: Why did the broccoli turn into potato chips? Or, is this a potato chip or broccoli?
As a result, the design actually makes it harder to understand.
Which snack corresponds to each vegetable?
Which one tastes the most like it?
Which one has packaging that looks the most like it?
So the focus of my research gradually shifted to:
Snack research. Rather than: Vegetable research.
Another important piece of feedback was that my target audience was still too broad. Although I kept referring to "children," I had not yet clearly defined which age group I was designing for. A five-year-old and a ten-year-old have very different cognitive abilities, eating habits, and ways of engaging with visual communication. My tutor encouraged me to define my audience more specifically before developing the concept further.
Refining the Audience
Looking back, I realised that I had been designing for an age group instead of a problem. Once I shifted the focus from "children" to "people who dislike vegetables," many of my previous concerns became less important. The project was no longer about persuading children to eat vegetables, but about understanding why vegetables are rejected and exploring how graphic design could rebuild that relationship.
The project shifted from designing for children to designing for a shared experience: disliking vegetables.