![]() Thus, a moving ad at the top of the page will be highly salient and will be perceived as annoying, so it will diminish the credibility of the site. This effect can be positive or negative, depending on how people interpret that element. According to BJ Fogg’s prominence-interpretation theory, the more prominent an element is on a page, the higher its impact will be on the overall credibility of the site. But if the page has certain design elements that stand out (for example, one red button in a wall of black text), System 1 will automatically be drawn by them. When users land on a page, they often have a goal in mind - that is, System 1 will start with some instructions from System 2. System 1 shapes how users judge site credibility. Not to say that poor usability won’t be noticed or remembered, or that usability is any less important, but if you’re courting new customers, it certainly helps to start off on the right foot in those first few milliseconds. Indeed, according to research by Gitte Lindgaard and her colleagues, a decision on aesthetics is made as early as 50 milliseconds into visiting a site, and rarely changes if you give people more time. System 1 is the one who decides very quickly, at a visceral level whether a site is beautiful. If a website is aesthetically pleasing, users will tend to remember the site as more usable than it actually was. People tend to be more forgiving of beautiful designs and less so of visually jarring ones. System 1 influences how users perceive the aesthetics, and indirectly, the usability of a site. Knowing this will save designers and UX practitioners from expending valuable time, energy, and money on content that will be ignored in the blink of an eye. This is why we emphasize that whatever is important to users at their current stage of their journey should actually look important - whether that means using a larger typeface, bold font, boxes, buttons, or other UI elements that stand out.īy anticipating user needs, we can guide users toward desirable actions (ethically, of course). Thus, first impressions are quick and mostly accurate, but not entirely fool-proof. In such cases, relevant information will be ignored just the same as the irrelevant information it looks like. System 1 is excellent at ruling out irrelevant information - except when relevant information looks like irrelevant information (for example, if it is embedded in the right rail and people mistake it for an ad). For example, if users want to search for information on a website, they might ignore everything but search indicators (a magnifying glass, the word “search”, or an input field). Indeed, eyetracking data indicates that scanning patterns on the web are optimized for the current goal. System 2 can “tell” System 1 what to attend to, depending on the task that it tries to solve. System 1 shapes how users judge the relevance of information.ĭuring information-search tasks, users quickly scan for relevant information and tend to interact with items that have high information scent. Why should designers care about the automatic, implicit processes of System 1? Here are some reasons: 1. System 1 enables us to rapidly identify the information relevant for a task, and System 2 uses this input to make a reasonably accurate decision. Carefully processing every object around us would be overwhelming and would take too long, making our primitive ancestors an easy prey for their enemies in the wild. System 1 provides us with shortcuts based on experience. Even when not completely in command, it provides much of the input upon which System 2 acts. However, in many of our behaviors, System 1 remains largely at the wheel. We tend to identify with our System 2 self: conscious, alert, and in control of our fates. System 2, on the other hand is slow and effortful, requiring our attention it is usually involved in complex activities such as mental math. System 1, our “automatic system,” is largely involuntary and requires little effort, but it is fast at detecting simple relationships or recognizing patterns. Two Systems of Information Processingĭaniel Kahneman in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow, describes two modes in which people process information: Systems 1 and 2. Consequently, as UX practitioners, we also need to understand how irrational behavior influences decision making, and take it into account in our designs. We make conscious decisions about what to eat, drink, read, wear, and so on but a large extent of cognitive processing happens before we direct our conscious attention toward it. We all like to think we are logical human beings in control of the decisions that we make.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |