61 Better Decisions

Hurrah! Recognizing that emotion is an inseparable and integral part of decision making is far better than trying to set things up on logic and structure alone. This applies to selling a car, arguing a case in court, and designing a web page.

In each case the end goal is different. And in each case, you can get by on low costs, facts and figures, or navigation structures, respectfully, but they will only get you so far. To consistently reach the goal (making a sale, winning a case, or letting a person complete their task), the emotional components must be factored in, or you risk getting derailed. (Although admittedly, in every case emotion isn’t always applied with the best intentions for the “end user”.)

The context of the decision and the goal to be reached will determine how deeply the emotional side can be addressed along with other factors: i.e. you usually don’t want much discussion about feelings when getting people out of a burning building. It’s a continuum of applicability, not an all-or-nothing situation. Sometimes emotional aspects of a subject or design will be highlighted front-and-center, sometimes more subtly addressed, or sometimes fall behind more pressing elements. Yet the consideration for how emotions will play in reaching the goal must be there somewhere.

Addressing emotion alongside cognition, rather than ignoring it or putting on a separate shelf, will help you get through shaky ground and see new opportunities for both yourself as the designer and those using your website.

Thanks for the article, Stephen.

posted at 05:08 am on May 26, 2009 by Murray Thompson

62 Agree about Nielsen

Ya, I agree with that early comment about Nielsen’s site. It’s really terrible to look at. My HTML mentor (i.e., he that introduces me to the web) is of the same mind as Nielsen. They seem to think that if the information is useful and relatively easy to access, then why waste time making it look pretty. Well, making it look pretty makes it even easier to use, as the author of this article has argued quite well. I look at Nielsen’s site, or my mentor’s and am dumbfounded. I just don’t know what to do with the site. I’m glad that this author could put into perspective my feelings when I visit not-so-pretty sites.

posted at 11:59 pm on June 6, 2009 by GreatKindness

63 Brilliant!

This is one of the best article’s ive ever read. It’s so hard trying to explain to some clients why they should pay for “good looking design.” Most of them just don’t get it.

I will definitely be using this article as reference for our clients.

I’d love to see more articles on this subject. Does anyone know of any similar?

posted at 11:35 am on June 15, 2009 by Waggit

64 Evolutionary Biology

Great write up. I think the citing of evolutionary biology alone drives the point home.

“We want those things we find pleasing to succeed. We’re more tolerant of problems with things that we find attractive.”

This is true in all things where perception plays a role. And since perception effects every aspect of our lives, it is always a factor. A man, unhappy with his wife’s ability to communicate or emphasize with him is more inclined to accept these flaws if say, dinner is made regularly, or if he finds her physical appearance, stunning.

As humans we both rightfully and wrongfully place our trust in things we find visually pleasing. Although in a tangible world, repeated use will eventually expose flaws. Online, would these exposed flaws not also seise to be tolerated. Where, a better option is sometimes a few clicks or a search query away.

Although this article, is filled with great sources and examples to defend the experience layer we as designers and developers have another responsibility. To not neglect the underlying process that we are dressing up. A flaw is a flaw, an inaccessible interface is still inaccessible. It’s about the difference between user experience and user satisfaction. In many cases these are one in the same, but relying too heavily on aesthetics alone will still result in a negative perception. Somewhere down the line.

posted at 10:28 pm on July 21, 2009 by Antoine Butler

65 Powerful Ammunition

Excellent article.

Every designer, developer and business person should read and embrace this. Knowing and understanding this will give anyone selling a design, application, product, whatever great “selling points”.

posted at 02:32 pm on December 29, 2009 by zuno

66 Thanks for the mind read...

I was just having a discussion about this last night. Graphic designers sometimes get caught designing for their own inner circle trends rather than what the hoi polloi who will be visiting a site look for. I recently read an article that lambasted bevels, shading, and drop shadows as frivolous, yet when I showed examples much like your button example to NON-DESIGNERS, the choice was overwhelming.

posted at 03:38 pm on December 29, 2009 by BertJ

67 Good article

Hi, thanks. This is a good article, and quite ad hoc to what we are doing now. Some months ago I got this Dilbert cartoon that talks about this topic:

http://andres.jaimes.net/2009/03/07/is-beauty-better-than-functional/

Thanks again…

posted at 11:21 pm on February 25, 2010 by ajaimes

68 Eye Candy gets people interested

@ Oliver “Our world is 3D – cluttered – structured – textured – colourful – shadowed – foggy – dusty.”

I love that Oliver! I think what a good web designer does is take all these aspects of reality and package them in a neat and structured way that upholds the content.

When people see something online that looks real, i think it sparks interest! People are more likely to PLAY with things and stare at them if they have a polished and unique look. And that’s a good foot in the door for any website!

posted at 01:04 am on March 29, 2010 by thesergie

69 UK web hosting

You have put a lot of efforts to write such wonderful article and it is been pleasure reading thorough it.

posted at 08:15 am on October 7, 2011 by Bodhostuk web hosting