This link has been bookmarked by 25 people . It was first bookmarked on 14 Feb 2007, by Will Richardson.
-
12 Mar 08
Rekha Murthy"...when applied with abandon, user control can mean user suffering."
-
05 Mar 08
-
24 May 07
-
14 Mar 07
-
He stands up for synthetic happiness: "Synthetic happiness is every bit as real and enduring as the kind of happiness you stumble upon when you get exactly what you were aiming for."
-
"It turns out that freedom - the ability to make up your mind and change your mind - is the friend to natural happiness, cuz it allows you to choose among all those delicious futures, and find the one that you would most enjoy. But freedom to choose - to change and make up your mind - is the enemy of synthetic happiness." -Dan Gilbert in his hilarious TED talk (Google Video).
-
Do you think that using synthetic happiness principles can be used to help users without betraying trust?
-
Posted by Kathy Sierra on February 13, 2007 | Permalink
-
Like everything else, it all comes back to user education. The more we help them learn and improve, the more control they can handle... and appreciate. By putting the user first, it's our job to give them the responsibility they want, but only when we know they're ready to handle it.
-
So we should be trying to give users more capability and control...and encouraging them to take it. But we must balance that with the learning they need to take that responsibility without being overwhelmed.
-
Putting users first does not necessarily mean putting users in charge.
I believe with all my heart in working with the user's happiness in mind (i.e. helping the user kick-ass), but part of my role is to use my specialized skills and knowledge to make that happen.
-
There's an ocean of difference between user contribution and user control. I'm sometimes afraid that the Age of User Participation will lead to the Age of Too Many People Doing Things They Are Not Qualified To Do But That Everyone Is OK With.
-
I'm probably just two button-presses away from success, but I swear the possible combinations of button-presses on my remote exceeds the number of particles in the known universe.
-
But we'll accept (and sometimes even value) pain and effort when it's worth it
-
-
The simple rule we so often forget is: >
The amount of pain and effort should match the user's perceived payoff. >
In other words, the user has to think it's worth it.
-
[For the record, I'm a big fan of splitting capabilities into different products, or having a really good user-level modes--where you use wizards or simpler interfaces for new users, etc. Yes, they're often done badly, but they don't have to be.]
-
The big problem is that we make our beginning users suffer just so our advanced users can tweak and tune their configurations, workflow, and output.
-
How much control should users have?
Obviously this is a big "it depends", but the main point is to focus on the relationship between user control and user capability. As user capability (knowledge, skill, expertise) increases, so should control
-
And in software programs, especially, we expect users to choose their workflow configurations way before they have the slightest idea why they'd care.
-
And we don't just agonize before we choose, the vast array of possibilities has us agonizing afterwards as well. Second-guessing ourselves, continuing to check reviews, etc. Like we don't have enough stress.
-
Worst of all, though, is the ongoing trend toward more-is-better for the products we purchase. More choices, more options, more control. In the book The Paradox of Choice, Barry Schwartz looks at how the overabundance of products today makes buying even toilet paper stressful. We shut down when we're faced with too many choices, even when those choices are about relatively simple things.
-
A huge part of the point of movies and novels is to be swept into another world--a world we do not have any responsibility for.
-
But when applied with abandon, user control can mean user suffering
-
We all know Featuritis is bad, but what about User Control? Is more always better? The notion that a user-centric focus means putting users in control of everything-
-
How much control should our users have?
-
-
11 Mar 07
-
09 Mar 07
-
19 Feb 07
-
16 Feb 07
-
14 Feb 07
Will RichardsonI realize that part of the Web 2.0 "sensibility" is that users are in charge, but I'm pretty sure even Tim O'Reilly doesn't mean that Web 2.0 means the inmates should be running the asylum. There's an ocean of difference between user contribution and user
-
Gordon Haff"The big problem is that we make our beginning users suffer just so our advanced users can tweak and tune their configurations, workflow, and output." Typically great post by Kathy Sierra
-
Dan CreswellAs usual, what users say they want and what they really want are two different things.
-
Lynne BLearners were put in charge of their own paths through material. The learner was empowered! Just one problem: most people pretty much suck at making sound learning decisions, especially when they don't already know the material.
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.