About user decision making
In a recent discussion, I found, it seemed to me, one common opinion regarding the relationship between users and developers. For the most part this concerns the responsibility of the first and second, and to be even more precise, the design of forms and the interaction of users with these forms.
It just so happened that many of us are not only users, but also developers of various products. One way or another, many of us have to end up not only from the user's side of the form, but also from the side with which this form has been developed. I think some underestimate the impact of their decisions on users and the consequences that may be in the end.
giner showed me the video, which I recommend to view all. www.snob.ru/selected/entry/5445 in this video is available and is explained by examples and proved why the developer makes decisions for the user at the design stage, how it works and why it happens at all. Who is too lazy to watch - I will retell the main thing in two words. In different countries, different numbers of people participate in the organ donation program. Serious thing after all. The countries are close in culture, they are close together and it seems that the attitude towards these things in them should be approximately the same. But statistics show that in some countries, 10-15% agree to participate in the program, and in other countries, 90-100% of people. The video shows that it does not depend on the mentality, but on the wording in the medical formulary. In one form it says “I refuse to participate in the program” and there it is necessary to put a tick, and in another form it says “I agree to participate in the program”. In most cases, the person does not put a daw. Does not change the state, does not make decisions. There are other examples. Generally a very interesting material, I recommend to view.
')
The same thing happens with our forms. Yes, you can encourage users to be reasonable, read carefully and make conscious decisions, but this does not work. Most likely the user will simply do everything by default, i.e. will do as you decide. It is we, the developers, who determine how the user will behave, even though he will have a choice. Yes, not always, but in a huge number of cases (if you rely on the researcher from the video - from 80 to 100%). Based on this, I argue that yes, the developer is responsible for the user's choice, since very often this choice is controlled by the developer.
It is very important that the default behavior is the least dangerous, causing the least harm. Under normal conditions, there should be no logs on the walkway, the hatches should be closed, the staircase has a railing. Yes, a person who wants to fall into the hatch will open it and throw it upside down, but this should not happen by default. And by itself, "by default" occurs very often, when the field is not mandatory. Or, for example, the checkbox - it is both established and not installed - already determines the behavior. The only choice when the developer does not affect it seems to me two radiobutton-on, neither of which is installed, but the installation of any of them is required. That's when a person will be obliged to make a choice, and then we can assume that his choice was not predetermined.
Just as many drivers scold pedestrians, and crossings scold drivers, and then buying a car and getting behind the wheel (or getting out of the car) many people open their eyes to what they are doing and their attitude to what is happening is changing - the attitude and former users - current developers. But as with motorists, many people continue to curse pedestrians at the wheel, and crossing the road curses the drivers. I was surprised by the reaction of the Habrovites, who themselves, most likely, quite recently swore at the default checkbox "subscribe to the mailing list", and now they are proving that this is good and right and they were themselves to blame.
Let's look at Habr. Serious community, entry threshold, account value and so on. What is needed in order to write a topic? The whole system is built for people to read the requirements! You could just put all this in the rules and ban anyone who does not comply with them. But nobody reads the rules, but such a mechanism works. This is natural, though not pleasant. Expect the user to read all of your rules, unless you specifically kick it - rashly. That is the natural order. Expect that it is in your case that it will be broken and the user will read the comments in the form and learn the rules - recklessly. Relying on the fact that the user will read and will comply - it is the same as relying on the fact that the rain will go from the bottom up.
If each of us thinks about the fact that the default values ​​set by him strongly influence the users' behavior and realizes that many decisions are actually made by us, by the developers - there will be fewer problems, there will be less discontent from users, and the use of our products will be easier .
Regardless of whether you consciously direct the user or not, you direct it. It is better to do this consciously and in the right direction.
It just so happened that many of us are not only users, but also developers of various products. One way or another, many of us have to end up not only from the user's side of the form, but also from the side with which this form has been developed. I think some underestimate the impact of their decisions on users and the consequences that may be in the end.
giner showed me the video, which I recommend to view all. www.snob.ru/selected/entry/5445 in this video is available and is explained by examples and proved why the developer makes decisions for the user at the design stage, how it works and why it happens at all. Who is too lazy to watch - I will retell the main thing in two words. In different countries, different numbers of people participate in the organ donation program. Serious thing after all. The countries are close in culture, they are close together and it seems that the attitude towards these things in them should be approximately the same. But statistics show that in some countries, 10-15% agree to participate in the program, and in other countries, 90-100% of people. The video shows that it does not depend on the mentality, but on the wording in the medical formulary. In one form it says “I refuse to participate in the program” and there it is necessary to put a tick, and in another form it says “I agree to participate in the program”. In most cases, the person does not put a daw. Does not change the state, does not make decisions. There are other examples. Generally a very interesting material, I recommend to view.
')
The same thing happens with our forms. Yes, you can encourage users to be reasonable, read carefully and make conscious decisions, but this does not work. Most likely the user will simply do everything by default, i.e. will do as you decide. It is we, the developers, who determine how the user will behave, even though he will have a choice. Yes, not always, but in a huge number of cases (if you rely on the researcher from the video - from 80 to 100%). Based on this, I argue that yes, the developer is responsible for the user's choice, since very often this choice is controlled by the developer.
It is very important that the default behavior is the least dangerous, causing the least harm. Under normal conditions, there should be no logs on the walkway, the hatches should be closed, the staircase has a railing. Yes, a person who wants to fall into the hatch will open it and throw it upside down, but this should not happen by default. And by itself, "by default" occurs very often, when the field is not mandatory. Or, for example, the checkbox - it is both established and not installed - already determines the behavior. The only choice when the developer does not affect it seems to me two radiobutton-on, neither of which is installed, but the installation of any of them is required. That's when a person will be obliged to make a choice, and then we can assume that his choice was not predetermined.
Just as many drivers scold pedestrians, and crossings scold drivers, and then buying a car and getting behind the wheel (or getting out of the car) many people open their eyes to what they are doing and their attitude to what is happening is changing - the attitude and former users - current developers. But as with motorists, many people continue to curse pedestrians at the wheel, and crossing the road curses the drivers. I was surprised by the reaction of the Habrovites, who themselves, most likely, quite recently swore at the default checkbox "subscribe to the mailing list", and now they are proving that this is good and right and they were themselves to blame.
Let's look at Habr. Serious community, entry threshold, account value and so on. What is needed in order to write a topic? The whole system is built for people to read the requirements! You could just put all this in the rules and ban anyone who does not comply with them. But nobody reads the rules, but such a mechanism works. This is natural, though not pleasant. Expect the user to read all of your rules, unless you specifically kick it - rashly. That is the natural order. Expect that it is in your case that it will be broken and the user will read the comments in the form and learn the rules - recklessly. Relying on the fact that the user will read and will comply - it is the same as relying on the fact that the rain will go from the bottom up.
If each of us thinks about the fact that the default values ​​set by him strongly influence the users' behavior and realizes that many decisions are actually made by us, by the developers - there will be fewer problems, there will be less discontent from users, and the use of our products will be easier .
Regardless of whether you consciously direct the user or not, you direct it. It is better to do this consciously and in the right direction.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/132148/
All Articles