large_Crossover Series NFTs.png

medium_Crossover Series NFTs.png

small_Crossover Series NFTs.png

thumbnail_Crossover Series NFTs.png

From Photography to NFT Art: Twisted Digital Landscapes with Nate Hill

From Design System to ‘NFT Design System’: Creating TinyFaces

Neurodiversity and Inclusion: Choosing Kinder Design

medium_652ccf22c8853584bde5553986a4eed0.png

small_652ccf22c8853584bde5553986a4eed0.png

thumbnail_652ccf22c8853584bde5553986a4eed0.png

Web5 is here. Goodbye Web3? TBD.

<p>Published on <a href="http://ift.tt/2sRtUNv">| Prototyping: From UX to Front End &mdash; Medium</a> Skjoldbroder <img alt="" src="http://ift.tt/2rLoovV">“I find your lack of notifications disturbing”</p>
<p>All designers engage in some level of choice architecture or nudging through their design judgements. It is important that designers are aware of the responsibility this entails, because ultimately, it is a way of exercising force.</p>
<h3>Nudging has a purpose: benevolence, not control!</h3>
<p>In <a href="http://ift.tt/1PjCHJ4"><em>Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness</em></a><em>, </em>Thaler &amp; Sunstein chalk up the argument for <em>nudging</em> — design choices that make people’s lives better and simpler, by offering beneficial choices first, while still leaving the choice up to people themselves. They call this “<em>paternal libertarianism”</em>.</p>
<blockquote><p>“The golden rule of libertarian paternalism: offer nudges that are most likely to help and least likely to inflict harm.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Thaler &amp; Sunstein emphasize that nudges should be used when decisions are difficult, rare, or hard to understand. For example — which tax plan you should use, or what type of mortgage would be best. They should not be used in common scenarios, or in cases where the user faces simple choices with ample feedback.</p>
<h3>Aggressive nudging in Facebook Messenger</h3>
<p>Messenger uses four main methods of nudging, which I would argue are “aggressive” and go against the stated purpose of nudging (to help the user). These four methods are: 1. biased signifiers, 2. misleading alerts, 3. repeat questions, and 4. repeat confirmations. Each of these are not — in themselves — enormous problems. But in aggregate, I would argue they constitute a form of nudging which is aggressive in nature.</p>
<h4>1. Biased signifiers</h4>
<p>In Messenger, this bias shows itself in calls to action that are animated or visually striking, compared to alternatives which are static or plain. The purpose: to attract your attention, and not-so-subtly indicate what would be the “best” option. In itself, this is not so unusual — we see it all the time in advertising, for example. But is it benevolent and helpful? Perhaps, although I don’t think so.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://ift.tt/2rLwbKe">There is little doubt what Facebook thinks is best for you</p>
<h4><strong>2. Misleading alerts</strong></h4>
<p>Red alert icons are used throughout Facebook Messenger, to indicate that you have omitted doing something important (i.e. enabling notifications) — another alert icon insists there is an unread message. Constantly alerting the user like this is misleading. You might call it <em>nudging through misinformation</em>.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://ift.tt/2suWLV1">Urgent matters require your attention! (Except they don’t really)</p>
<blockquote><p>I don’t want to suggest that Facebook’s designers have nefarious purposes — that would be a stretch, and unfair to all the talented people working there. What I would like to propose is that in this case, the thinking has been primarily inside out, driven by what Facebook wants, rather than what the user needs.</p></blockquote>
<h4>3. Repeatedly asking you the same question</h4>
<p>During installation of Messenger, you are asked three times, whether you want to enable notifications or not. This suggests that you are missing out on something, when actually you are simply making a choice and exercising user control.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://ift.tt/2rLpcB7">Maybe if you ask more than once, you’ll get a “yes”</p>
<h4>4. Repeatedly asking for confirmation</h4>
<p>Continually asking for confirmation — “are you sure? Are you REALLY sure, because you might lose out?” is a way of suggesting that you are somehow venturing into unknown or dangerous territory. This suggestive tone of voice is also a way of nudging you, since it implies that your choice is wrong.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://ift.tt/2svawmA">Are you really sure you want to go through with your obviously flawed decision?</p>
<h3>Why should we care about small stuff like this?</h3>
<p>As designers, we are exerting influence on the world. The choices we make affect how people can achieve their goals. Our choices affect their lives, even. As such, we are under a moral obligation to <em>serve</em> those we design for, and to design with benevolent intentions. Therefore, it is also important that we not design pushy apps, or apply “dark UX” design patterns such as aggressive nudging.</p>
<p>Finally, I don’t want to suggest that Facebook’s designers have nefarious purposes — that would be a stretch, and unfair to all the talented people working there. What I would like to propose is that in this case, the thinking has been primarily inside-out, driven by what Facebook wants, rather than what the user needs.</p>
<h3>Thank you for reading!</h3>
<p>If you feel that I’m unfair or wrong in my characterisation here, please do leave me a comment, I’d love to hear your thoughts. (I’d also love to hear if you agree, for that matter) 🙂</p>
<h4>Further reading</h4>
<ul>
<li>Thaler &amp; Sunstein, “<a href="http://ift.tt/1PjCHJ4"><em>Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness</em></a><em>”</em></li>
<li>Fuller &amp; Goffey, “<a href="http://ift.tt/2rLzUrb"><em>Evil Media</em></a>”</li>
<li>Don Norman, “<a href="http://ift.tt/2sv91oO"><em>The Design of Everyday Things</em></a><em>”</em></li>
<li>NNGroup.com, “<a href="http://ift.tt/2pjRYWt"><em>Stop Shaming Your Users for Micro Conversions</em></a><em>”</em></li>
<li>Nelson &amp; Stolterman, “<a href="http://ift.tt/2svanzy"><em>The Design Way</em></a><em>”</em></li>
</ul>
<p><img src="http://ift.tt/2rLfVsM" width="1" height="1" alt="stat?event=post.clientViewed&amp;referrerSou"></p>
<hr>
<p><a href="http://ift.tt/2suOAs8">Aggressive nudging — dark-side UX in Facebook Messenger</a> was originally published in <a href="http://ift.tt/2cAqCpx">Prototyping: From UX to Front End</a> on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.</p>


Aggressive nudging — dark-side UX in Facebook Messenger

Aggressive nudging — dark-side UX in Facebook Messenger

Top Stories