The UX paradox
As Steve Jobs said, “You've got to start with the customer experience and work backwards to the technology. You can't start with the technology and try to figure out where can I sell it.” (Travis 2018). User Experience is an increasingly hot field as the tech world is making an effort to put user needs above the technology itself.
My research sets out to explore the question, why is it so hard to switch from one tech brand to another? As a windows user, why is it hard for me to adjust to a mac? Does this mean one company has better intuitive design, or did I just get used to one brand’s design regardless of whether it’s more “intuitive” or not? I want to understand how much influence our inherited tendencies have on our user experience compared to how much influence our learned behaviour has. This could have useful applications in the market, like determining how to convert Apple iPhone users into Google Pixel users, as you would need to minimize the amount of time it takes to “adjust” to the new interface. It would be helpful to know if this adjustment is made easier by mimicking other popular brands’ designs, or by reverting to a purely “intuitive” design. This research also has implications on how much power these companies have in shifting the paradigm in the field of UX - if humans learn new platforms so easily, then we have a lot of power in shaping mental models.
According to Susan Carey’s, a mental model “represents a person’s thought process for how something works (i.e., a person’s understanding of the surrounding world)” (Carey 1986). In the case of UX design, Mental models are heavily based on past experiences, and intuitive perceptions. First, I will explore mental models and the complex variables that play into shaping our user tendencies. Then, I will suggest an experimental design which would test how strongly past user experiences and pure inherent user tendencies affect our future experiences.
A research review on Inclusive and Intuitive Design lists different sources of knowledge which influence how a user interacts with a platform: innate knowledge - instinctive behaviour that is genetically programmed, sensorimotor knowledge - learned behaviour through interaction with the world, culture - values and communications styles, and expertise - “specialist knowledge acquired in one’s profession” (Hurtienne et. all 2008). The questions I am exploring focuses on distinguishing the innate knowledge from sensorimotor knowledge, and the strength of their influence on user experience.
The above review also emphasizes the importance of memory on the application of knowledge, “...the more frequent the encoding and retrieval was in the past, the more likely it is that memorised knowledge is applied automatically and subconsciously” (Hurtienne et. all 2008). I also suspect that emotions have a significant role in this process - for example, gaming apps that have reward systems can produce feelings of euphoria, having an impactful effect on the amygdala, and can produce a lasting inclination towards platforms with a similar UX. If past user experience has such a strong influence on our interactions with digital platforms, perhaps innate knowledge is not as important to consider in the design process.
My proposed experimental design would have two experimental groups. Group A would have participants that are instructed to adjust to a very poorly designed platform that is hardly intuitive, over a sufficient period of time. Group B would use a platform that is well designed, up to the standards of Apple or Google’s UX, for the same period of time. Then, both groups would switch to another platform, that’s also well designed and caters to user intuition, and the adjustment period is measured. Here, it would be interesting to see how quickly Group A adjusts vs. Group B. If it’s the case that previous user experience trumps inherent user activity, Group A would have a much more difficult time adjusting than Group B, even though their second experience is much more user friendly. However, if it’s the case that inherent tendencies have a much stronger effect on usability, then Group A may have similar adjustment times as Group B. Group B already had a similar user experience as the second product, so they should have an easy time adjusting in either case.
Companies with widely used platforms are shaping UX for the future. They can monopolize this learning curve and have people get hooked on a design, making it difficult to switch brands. The importance of inherited knowledge gives other companies a chance to always have a space to compete in the market.
References
Carey, S. (1986). Cognitive science and science education. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1123–1130. https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1123
Hurtienne J., Weber K., Blessing L. (2008) Prior Experience and Intuitive Use: Image Schemas in User Centred Design. In: Langdon P., Clarkson J., Robinson P. (eds) Designing Inclusive Futures. Springer, London
Travis, David. (2018) “Steve Jobs on 6 Key Principles of User Experience.” UserFocus, www.userfocus.co.uk/articles/Steve-Jobs-on-6-key-principles-of-ux.html.