Interaction Design: Avoid design errors that occur to users

first, how to understand the content of this article:

An example of "simple" and "complex"

When I and the developers communicate a project requirements, they often sigh with regret mockup design considerations of the details, many programs to implement the pre-and "non-basic function points" so that developers are reluctant to implement. Compared with designers in order to allow users to avoid mistakes and racked their brains to imagine and consider, developers are more inclined to give a direct to allow the operation of the action, the other illegal request all the error: "The program is rigorous, he was wrong, I error, status quo." Isn't it a little easy ? "Programmers are even laughing:" Considering how much they experience, the experience we've developed is really bad, please, can we please not make things so complicated ?

In this example, the programmer seems to consider the various situations that users may have in the process of interacting with the system, looking for the most obvious, easiest, and most user-error design that is inefficient and time-consuming. The designer does this by complicating the simple things. OK, now there is such a question, what is "wrong"? Is the user really "making a mistake" whenever the program wants to handle the wrong request?

1 , question one, whose fault is it?

When I used a website's photo album feature one day, I encountered this situation (pictured below):

"Normal upload" is the current selected state, and the button to upload "Cancel" is the same style. Because the selected state has a "positive, OK" potential hint, so the negative operation and positive operation of the state is completely confused, users in the upload process is prone to the wrong point "Cancel" button as a confirmation of the completion of the upload task error operation.

If this is really happening (there should be a few, like I happened in the local very difficult to choose a good picture delayed like "Confirm" function "Cancel" and do not work hard situation), yes, the user made a mistake, but the responsibility is not in the user? "I wouldn't have made a mistake, it was your design that made me wrong, or at least increased my chances of making a mistake." " similar to such errors, the system may or may not, but the real should be reviewed is the system itself, namely: User understanding of the interface and its own system intent error, system design ambiguity and other inherent defects resulting in user error." The reason why users frequently hit the wall and create frustration is not the stupidity of the user, but the stupidity of the design.

2 , question two, is this not a mistake?

The 2nd of the interpretation of the word "error" is mainly aimed at the user's behavior layer of the system, that is, the user's misoperation in the Man-machine interface interaction, the system fails to reduce and avoid the loss caused by the user's misoperation through better design.

or "Upload photos" For example (pictured below):

A modal warning box, impressively tells you, you want to upload photos here, should not use in addition to IE browser! In addition to not planning to inform you in advance, but also did not discuss, because I did not give you other alternative options and other options.

Can imagine, users want to use this upload photo function, already need to go through a lot of steps, such as to open their own albums stored online address, to successfully login into the management background, to find the upload photos of the functional modules, etc., has paid a considerable part of the operating costs. But the system is very cruel to let the user all work is white, not only that, but also very barbaric way to tell users: you from the beginning is wrong! In this case, there is no error in the user's understanding of the system, but there is a serious frustration in the process of interaction. But is this really a user error and a responsibility that needs to be borne? I don't think so:"Strictly speaking, I'm not making a mistake, I'm just not sure what I can do and how to do it." "

From the above two cases, I think that can be a preliminary answer to the programmer classmate's question: "Yes, simplicity is always good, but in the process of interaction, the event is always complex, the possibility of what may happen is always so much, not you think for him more, let him simple; More complex, worse experience. "

3 , question three, what to do:

About three realms of fault tolerant design:

1, to ensure that it is not our own fault : shielding will cause ambiguity in the design, its unreasonable design, do not let users because of the system design defects caused by mistakes.

2, the simple left to the user, the complex to leave themselves: through the system of good design constraints and guide the user's operation, the possibility of the error to minimize.

3, reduce the cost of error, to help users do the right : when the user or made a mistake, through the design to guide the user to the right direction.

For interaction designers, the first is the bottom line of design that should be adhered to, and 232 is the design Guide to be followed at design time. The third article, about how to help and guide the user to do after the error, Changxuan students will then write a special article to explore this issue, here is not to repeat, the following mainly on the second article to talk about some views: