Skip navigation
Help

Interaction design

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /var/www/vhosts/sayforward.com/subdomains/recorder/httpdocs/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.
Original author: 
Cesar Torres


Tumblr Creative Director Peter Vidani

Cesar Torres

New York City noise blares right outside Tumblr’s office in the Flat Iron District in Manhattan. Once inside, the headquarters hum with a quiet intensity. I am surrounded by four dogs that employees have brought to the workspace today. Apparently, there are even more dogs lurking somewhere behind the perpendicular rows of desks. What makes the whole thing even spookier is that these dogs don’t bark or growl. It’s like someone’s told them that there are developers and designers at work, and somehow they’ve taken the cue.

I’m here to see Tumblr’s Creative Director Peter Vidani who is going to pull the curtain back on the design process and user experience at Tumblr. And when I say design process, I don’t just mean color schemes or typefaces. I am here to see the process of interaction design: how the team at Tumblr comes up with ideas for the user interface on its website and its mobile apps. I want to find out how those ideas are shaped into a final product by their engineering team.

Back in May, Yahoo announced it was acquiring Tumblr for $1.1 billion. Yahoo indicated that Tumblr would continue to operate independently, though we will probably see a lot of content crossover between the millions of blog posts hosted by Tumblr and Yahoo’s search engine technology. It’s a little known fact that Yahoo has provided some useful tools for UX professionals and developers over the years through their Design Pattern Library, which shares some of Yahoo’s most successful and time-tested UI touches and interactions with Web developers. It’s probably too early to tell if Tumblr’s UI elements will filter back into these libraries. In the meantime, I talked to Vidani about how Tumblr UI features come to life.

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

  

Have you ever looked at a bizarre building design and wondered, “What were the architects thinking?” Or have you simply felt frustrated by a building that made you uncomfortable, or felt anger when a beautiful old building was razed and replaced with a contemporary eyesore? You might be forgiven for thinking “these architects must be blind!” New research shows that in a real sense, you might actually be right.

That’s Michael Mehaffy and Nikos A. Salingaros describing a phenomenon we’re all familiar with, in their article “Architectural Myopia: Designing for Industry, Not People.” As I read the article, I became increasingly uncomfortable as I realized that the whole thing might as well have been written about Web design (and about our responses to the designs of our peers). How often do we look at a website or app and remark to ourselves (and on Twitter) that “these designers must have been blind!” Sometimes we’re just being whiney about minute details (as we should be), but other times we do have a point: “What were they thinking?”

Longaberger-building-in-Newark
Longaberger Home Office, Newark, Ohio. Image source.

In this article, we’ll discuss “designer myopia”: the all-too-common phenomenon whereby, despite our best intentions, we sometimes design with a nearsightedness that results in websites and applications that please ourselves and impress our peers but don’t meet user and business goals. With Mehaffy and Salingaros’s article as our guide, we’ll investigate the causes of designer myopia, and then explore some solutions to help us take the focus off ourselves and back on the people we’re designing for.

The Causes Of Designer Myopia

If the language in the opening paragraph sounds familiar, it’s because most of us privately and publicly mutter “What were they thinking?” almost every day as we move across the Web. We analyze the new Twitter app; we take it upon ourselves to redesign popular websites — and then we wonder if we should even be doing that. One thing is clear, though: we’re good at pointing out designer myopia in our peers.

But what are the causes of this lack of imagination and foresight in our work? Shouldn’t we be smart enough to avoid the obvious traps of designing too much from our own viewpoints and not taking the wider user context in mind? Well, it turns out that we quite literally see the world very differently than others. Again, from “Architectural Myopia”:

Instead of a contextual world of harmonious geometric relationships and connectedness, architects tend to see a world of objects set apart from their contexts, with distinctive, attention-getting qualities.

In other words, we see typography and rounded corners where normal people just see websites to get stuff done on. We see individual shapes and colors and layout where our users just see a page on the Internet. Put another way, we’re unable to see the forest for the trees.

How did we get here? Notice the striking resemblance to Web design as Mehaffy and Salingaros describe the slippery slope that has led to this state in architecture:

With the coming of the industrial revolution, and its emphasis on interchangeable parts, the traditional conception of architecture that was adaptive to context began to change. A building became an interchangeable industrial design product, conveying an image, and it mattered a great deal how attention-getting that image was. The building itself became a kind of advertisement for the client company and for the architect (and in the case of residences, for the homeowner seeking a status symbol). The context was at best a side issue, and at worst a distraction, from the visual excitement generated by the object.

This is why we often see designs that seem to be built for Dribbble, portfolios and “7 Jaw-Dropping Minimalist Designs” blog posts, instead of being “adaptive to context” based on user needs. We have gained much from the “industrialization” of design through UI component libraries and established patterns, but we’ve also lost some of the unique context-based thinking that should go into solving every design problem.

Jon Tan touches on this in “Taxidermista,” his excellent essay on design galleries in the first issue of The Manual:

Galleries do not bear sole responsibility for how design is commissioned. However, they do encourage clients and designers to value style more than process. They do promote transient fashion over fit and make trends of movements such as minimalism or styles like grunge or the ubiquitous Apple-inspired aesthetic.

The result of all of this is that we sometimes end up designing primarily for ourselves and our close-knit community. Jeffrey Goldberg reminds us that this is true for much of the technology industry in “Convenience Is Security”:

Security systems (well, the good ones anyway) are designed by people who fully understand the reasons behind the rules. The problem is that they try to design things for people like themselves — people who thoroughly understand the reasons. Thus we are left with products that only work well for people who have a deep understanding of the system and its components.

And so we end up with a proliferation of beautiful websites and applications that only we find usable.

Dilbert Cartoon
We all follow some rules of thumb without understanding the reasons behind them.

We can’t talk about designing primarily for the community without bringing up the awkward point that we often do it deliberately. We thrive on the social validation that comes from positive Twitter comments, being featured in design galleries and getting a gazillion Dribbble likes. And let’s be honest: that validation also helps us get more clients. This is just part of human nature, and not necessarily a bad thing. But it can be a bad thing; so at the very least, we need to call it out as another possible cause for designer myopia so that we can be conscious of it.

The Manual
The Manual brings clarity to the ‘why’ of Web design, and much more.

Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s ask the obvious next question. Why are we so good at noticing when others fall into the myopia trap but fail to catch ourselves when we do it? In “Why We’re Better at Predicting Other People’s Behaviour Than Our Own,” Christian Jarrett reports on some recent research that might provide the answer:

[When] predicting our own behaviour, we fail to take the influence of the situation into account. By contrast, when predicting the behaviour of others, we correctly factor in the influence of the circumstances. This means that we’re instinctually good social psychologists but at the same time we’re poor self-psychologists.

In other words, we’re much better at taking the entire context into consideration when looking at other people’s designs than when we are creating our own. Scary stuff.

So, if designer myopia is indeed a pervasive problem (and if we are not good at recognizing it in ourselves), what do we do to fix it? I’d like to propose some established but often-ignored techniques to get us out of this dilemma.

1. Conduct Observational User Research In Context

The first thing that Mehaffy and Salingaros suggest in their article to overcome myopia is this:

First of all, re-integrate the needs of human beings, their sensory experience of the world, and their participation into the process of designing buildings. Leading design theory today advocates “co-design,” in which the users become part of the design team, and guide it through the evolutionary adaptations to make a more successful, optimal kind of design. Architects spend more time talking to their users, sharing their perception and understanding their needs: not just the architect’s selfish need for artistic self-expression, or worse, his/her need to impress other architects and elite connoisseur-critics.

Note that this is not just about asking users what they think. It’s about making users part of the design process in a helpful, methodologically sound manner. To accomplish this, we can look to anthropology to play a substantial role in the design of products and experiences. Ethnography (often called contextual inquiry in the user-centered design world) is the single best way to uncover unmet needs and make sure we are solving the right problems for our users.

In “Using Ethnography to Improve User Experience,” Bonny Colville Hyde describes ethnography as follows:

Ethnographers observe, participate and interview groups of people in their natural environments and devise theories based on analysis of their observations and experiences. This contrasts with other forms of research that generally set out to prove or disprove a theory.

That’s the core of it: we do ethnography to learn, not to confirm our beliefs. By using this method to understand the culture and real needs of our users, we’re able to design better user-centered solutions than would be possible if we relied only on existing UI patterns and some usability testing.

Leaving the office and spending time observing users in their own environments is the best way to understand how a product is really being used in the wild. It’s the most efficient way to get out of your own head.

2. Design To Blend In

Let’s stick with the architecture theme for a moment. The concept of “paving the cowpaths” is another effective way to look beyond ourselves and to design websites and applications that form part of our users’ landscapes (rather than break their mental models). In “Architecture, Urbanism, Design and Behaviour: A Brief Review,” Dan Lockton writes:

One emergent behavior-related concept arising from architecture and planning which has also found application in human-computer interaction is the idea of desire lines, desire paths or cowpaths. The usual current use of the term […] is to describe paths worn by pedestrians across spaces such as parks, between buildings or to avoid obstacles […] and which become self-reinforcing as subsequent generations of pedestrians follow what becomes an obvious path. […]

[T]here is potential for observing the formation of desire lines and then “codifying” them in order to provide paths that users actually need, rather than what is assumed they will need. In human-computer interaction, this principle has become known as “Pave the cowpaths”.

This is such an interesting perspective on user-centered design. By starting a design project with an explicit goal to “pave the cowpaths,” we will always be pulled back into a frame of mind that asks how the design can better blend in with our users’ lives and with what they already do online. The same questions will keep haunting us, and rightly so:

  • Do we have analytics to back up this behavior?
  • Are we sure this is what users naturally do on the website?
  • We know that most users click on this navigation element to get things done. How do we make that behavior easier for them?

In the same paragraph in “Taxidermista,” Jon Tan also calls for us to step back and ask questions like these before starting to design:

The answers to a project’s questions may have something to do with fashion, but not often. Good design does not have a shelf life. The best web designers gently disregard issues of style at the start. They rewind their clients back to asking the right questions, so they can rewrite the brief and understand the objectives before they propose solutions.

By asking the right questions, we focus our effort on fitting into the ways that users move on the Web, as opposed to bending them to our will.

3. Triangulate Results

The two recommendations above are very specific, so I’d also like to make a more general point. There are, of course, several other user-research methodologies to help us get into the minds of users and bring them into the design process in a helpful, meaningful way. Methods such as concept testing, participatory design and, of course, usability testing all have their place. But the real power lies in using not just one or two of these methods, but three or more. This is where triangulation comes in:

Triangulation is a powerful technique that facilitates validation of data through cross verification from more than two sources. In particular, it refers to the application and combination of several research methodologies in the study of the same phenomenon.

Using multiple data sources — both qualitative and quantitative — is a great way to avoid any myopia traps along the way. In addition to (or instead of, depending on the project) the two methodologies covered above, you should use as many appropriate techniques as possible to help confirm your intuition and direction.

As Catriona Cornett points out in “Using Multiple Data Sources and Insights to Aid Design”:

When used correctly, data from multiple sources can allow us to better identify the context in which our designs live. It can help us validate our assumptions and approach design with confidence and not subjective opinion. This not only helps to create better design, but also helps us achieve that all-important buy-in from stakeholders. It’s easier to defend a design when you have deep, rich insights to back it up.

The first response I get when proposing triangulation (or sometimes even just one research method) is usually, “We don’t have time!” The good news is that this doesn’t have to slow you down — even an hour at a coffee shop observing real users with your product will shock you out of your myopia. The only thing that’s not an option is skipping research completely.

Summary

User research and the techniques discussed in this article aren’t new, but they’re usually left to specialist researchers to champion, or they’re swept under the rug because “We’re using established UI patterns on this one.” Hopefully, this article has shown that designer myopia is too common and too dangerous to ignore or to be left to specialist researchers to fix. Sure, user researchers are critical to ensuring that a proper methodology is followed, but we can all get out there and use the data and information available to us to make sure we don’t put too much of our own viewpoints into our designs.

Web design is personal — deeply personal. As Alex Charchar puts it in his gut-wrenching essay for The Manual:

I now know that it is through love and passion and happiness that anything of worth is brought into being. A fulfilled and accomplished life of good relationships and craftsmanship is how I will earn my keep.

I doubt that any of us would disagree with those words. Our best work happens when we throw ourselves wholeheartedly into it. But this outlook on life and design comes with its own dangers that we need to watch out for. And the biggest danger is in being unable to see beyond our own passion and taste and, with the best intentions, in failing to make the necessary connections with our users.

My hope for all of us is that the three simple guidelines discussed here — contextual user research, designing to blend in, and research triangulation — will enable us to keep the perspective we need as we throw everything we’ve got at the design problems that we have to solve every day.

(al) (il)

© Rian van der Merwe for Smashing Magazine, 2012.

0
Your rating: None

  

Product pages for e-commerce websites are often rife with ambitions: recreate the brick-and-mortar shopping experience, provide users with every last drop of product information, build a brand persona, establish a seamless check-out process.

As the “strong link in any conversion,” product pages have so much potential. We can create user-centric descriptions and layouts that are downright appropriate in their effectiveness: as Erin Kissane says, “offering [users] precisely what they need, exactly when they need it, and in just the right form.”

Beyond that, a user-centered creation process for product pages can help brand the information as well as reduce the content clutter that so often bogs down retail websites.

User-centric product copy garners positive results because it anticipates the user’s immediate reaction. As Dr. Timo Saari and Dr. Marko Turpeinen, authors of “Towards Psychological Customization of Information for Individuals and Social Groups” suggest, individual differences in processing information implicates dramatic variances in type and/or intensity of psychological effects, such as positive emotion, persuasion, and depth of learning (2).

We can describe products in various ways. Highlighting certain aspects of a product will elicit different reactions from various users. Gearing product descriptions to a particular audience encourages those users to effectively process the information, heightens persuasion, and increases the potential to predict what the users want (but didn’t know they needed). The effort required of user-centric product descriptions demands that we understand how certain descriptors, contexts and inclusions of details affect the target user, and that we then put our discoveries into action.

This article offers a user-centric guide to producing product pages and provides examples of successful e-commerce websites that present user-centric approaches to product page descriptions and layouts.

Get To Know Your User

Approaching product page description and layout from a user-centric perspective demands that we have a rich understanding of the target user. As Saari and Turpeinen suggest, Web customization starts with some type of model, be it individual, group or community. With your user models in place, you can best assess what they need and how to write for them.

In her book Letting Go of the Words, Web usability expert Janice Redish suggests these strategies for getting to know your target user:

  • Scope the email responses that come through the website’s “Contact Us” form and other feedback links. Consider the profiles of the senders. You can discover commonalities in lifestyle, technological capability, education level and communication preference through these channels.
  • Talk to the customer service or marketing employees at your company. Don’t approach them with a broad demand to describe the typical client. Rather, ask questions about their interactions with clients. Who is calling in? Who is stopping by the office? What queries and complaints are common?
  • Offer short questionnaires to visitors to the website. Redish suggests asking people “a few questions about themselves, why they came to the site, and whether they were successful in finding what they came for.”
  • If possible, acquire a sense of the client simply by observing the people who walk through the front doors of the business. This is a great way to pick up on key phrases, jargon, emotional behavior and demographics.

Once you’re able to confidently brainstorm the major characteristics of your target user or group, then developing the models to guide the writing process comes next.

Keep in mind that gathering and compiling this information can take as little or as big an investment of time and money as you (or the client) can afford and still be effective. As Leonard Souza recently noted, even stopping in a nearby coffee shop to engage five to ten people in your target demographic can yield useful insight. With a bit of flexibility, you can find learning opportunities that are convenient and on the cheap.

The models created from your user research can be fashioned into personas, which Souza describes as “tools for creating empathy among everyone in the project.” Use personas to guide user-centric copywriting by establishing very specific user goals and preferences.

A persona is a fictional person amalgamated from the characteristics of your target user. You can get creative here with the persona’s name and image, but not too creative. The persona must be mindfully constructed according to the age, education, family status and other personal details culled from your research.

Now that you have a persona to please as you construct a product description and layout hierarchy, staying user-centric is that much easier. Take a look at the product description from Lululemon, a British Columbia-based yoga-wear retailer:

Product page for lululemon.com
Product description from Shop.lululemon.com

The product description assumes that the reader knows a specific set of jargon: How many non-yoga participants would know what downward-dog means? Or “pipes”, as the “Key Features” section refers to arms? This content drives right to the needs and preferences of a very specific user. She wants warmth (four of the “Key Features” note the thermal quality of the product), convenience (pre-shrunk fabric, easy layering), and motivation for an active lifestyle (she recognizes the yoga jargon and enjoys giving her “pipes some air time”).

A rich understanding of the user has made this product page effective and delightfully specific to both the user and the brand.

Master S.M.A.R.T. Content and Layout

Without specific, measurable, actionable, relevant and trackable user goals driving the copy on the product page, the information will sag. I draw here from Dickson Fong’s enlightening article “The S.M.A.R.T. User Experience Strategy“ to suggest that care should be taken to develop user goals that guide the writing process for product pages.

The S.M.A.R.T. formula will keep you on track as you plot out product details and decide what descriptive angle to use.

Fong provides an excellent user goal for a product page: “I want to learn more about this product’s design, features and specifications to determine whether it fits my budget, needs and preferences.”

This will help you create a checklist when assessing what to present first and what to offer as optional information when structuring the layout of the page (more about that in the “Create Information Hierarchies” section below). It provides direction when you’re writing content and helps you focus on the benefits to the user. And as Darlene Maciuba-Koppel suggests in The Web Writer’s Guide, “In copywriting, your end goal is to sell benefits, not products, in your copy.”

For users, benefits and accomplished goals go hand in hand. A product that doesn’t fit their budget, needs or preferences offers them little benefit. So, in order for S.M.A.R.T. goal-driven product pages to serve user-centric purposes, the text must follow suit. Fong suggests presenting relevant content details that are specific to the consumer of that product type.

Let’s take Fong’s S.M.A.R.T. user goal for product pages and assess the specifications at play on the following two pages from Dell:

Product page for Dell.com
Product page for Alienware on Dell.com

Featured on Alienware, Dell’s computer subsidiary for high-performance gaming, the description for this desktop computer has been tailored to the primary browsing goal of a very specific user. The needs and preferences of the user have already been predicted in the bullet-point outline, highlighting optimum graphics and top-notch liquid-cooling capabilities, thus harmonizing the checklist of features with a checklist of benefits for the user. A number of the product’s features could have been highlighted, but for optimal ease, the specifics most likely to help the user accomplish their goals are featured.

With the next Dell desktop computer, another goal of the target user is covered in the description:

Product page for Dell.com
Product page description for Inspiron 570 on Dell.com

With a noticeable absence of technical details and a heavy emphasis on product personalization, this description plays to a user with very different needs than the Alienware shopper’s. Even the tabs have been re-arranged to best meet the user’s goals. The Inspiron 570 page shows “Customer ratings” as the first tab, while the Alienware page offers “Design” first and then “Tech specs.”

These decisions are all geared to accomplishing very specific user goals: find the required information and assess the benefits.

Use Personal Pronouns

Consider again Dell’s description of its Inspiron 570:

Make It Yours

The Inspiron 570 desktop is everything you want and nothing you don’t. Available in vibrant colors, so you can complement your style or stand out from the crowd. Plus, you can build your desktop according to your needs with a choice of multiple AMD processors and NVIDIA ATI graphics cards as well as other customizable features. So whether you are surfing the Web, emailing friends and family, downloading music and photos or blogging about it all, the Inspiron 570 desktop can handle it.

Your wants, your style, your needs, your friends and your Internet past-times. Including the title, eight instances of “you” or “your” turn up in this 86-word segment!

Personal pronouns in product descriptions are perfectly appropriate and quite effective at engaging users, because, as Redish states, “People are much more likely to take in [messages] if you write with ‘you’ because they can see themselves in the text.”

With Dell’s content, the personal pronouns target a specific user (one who is savvy enough to download music and email and who is interested in customization and feeling unique), while also managing a broad gender appeal.

Outdoor equipment retailer REI employs personal pronouns in its online product descriptions, creating dynamic scenarios aimed at a specific user:

Saranac product description
Product description for REI.com

The description asserts that this canoe will help you navigate a waterway that “you’ve recently noticed,” anticipating a specific user reality (or dream).

The product showcase is devoted to the user’s needs and showing how the user will benefit from purchasing the canoe. Using “you” is the clearest and most direct way for this retailer to grab the user’s attention and to convince them, at any time of the year, that this canoe is the right buy.

Angie King backs this up in her article “Personal Pronouns: It’s Okay to Own Your Web Copy.” She suggests that using first- and second-person pronouns helps users connect with the content, and “reflect[s] the way real people write and speak,” fostering an immediate connection.

For a product description to speak directly to a specific user or group, the “you’s” should flow freely.

Use Information Hierarchies

Adopting a user-centric approach to the layout and copy of product pages helps you tackle the challenge articulated by Kean Richmond: “How do you cram so much information into a single Web page?”

In addition to technical specifications, shipping information, item details and preference options (and don’t forget that compelling product description), product pages must also list every describable service that the product performs for its user, including customer benefits (as Darlene Maciuba-Koppel explains, too).

By all means, provide the user with every last detail possible. Answer every conceivable question, or make the answer visible for discovery. Do so with information hierarchies that are based on a rich understanding of targeted users. This will keep each page tidy and drive users to complete your business goals.

In a structure in which, as Kean Richmond states, “all the important information is at the top and [the rest] flows naturally down the page,” details that might not be a top priority for the target user can be tucked into optional tabs or presented at the bottom of the page. The key is to gauge the structure of the page with the sensibilities of the targeted user in mind.

Look At User Context

Here’s where you become a mind-reader of sorts. Erin Kissane points to the approach of content strategist Daniel Eizan in understanding what specific users need to see on the page in order to be drawn into the information. Eizan looks at the user’s context to gauge their Web-browsing behaviors. Eizan asks, What are they doing? How are they feeling? What are they capable of?

Establishing user context aids in planning an information hierarchy, and it is demonstrated by small and large e-retailers. On the big-box side, we have Walmart:

Product page for Walmart.com

By making the price and product name (including the unit number per order) immediately visible, Walmart has anticipated a possible user context. A Walmart visitor searching for granola bars has perhaps purchased the product before. With the unit price made visible, perhaps the anticipated user is judging the product based on whether this box size will suffice.

Details such as “Item description” and “Specifications” are options that are convenient to the user who is making a large order of a familiar product.

The user’s context shapes the hierarchy: the user seeks a quick calculation of units per product versus price. The targeted user does not immediately need an ingredients list, allergy information or a description of the flavor. But if they do, they are available in a neat options-based format.

Walmart has built its reputation on “Everyday low prices,” and the brick-and-mortar philosophy has crossed over to its website. Walmart anticipates users who have some familiarity with its products and who have expectations of certain price points. These factors play into the information hierarchy across the website.

Now look at the product page of a different kind of retailer, nutrition bar manufacturer Larabar:

Product page for Larabar.com
Cashew Cookie product page from Larabar.com

Here is an online presentation of a retail product that is similar to Walmart’s Nature Valley granola bar (though some might argue otherwise).¬†However, the information hierarchy clearly speaks to a different user — a specific user, one who might be looking for gluten-free snack foods or a vegan protein solution. The Larabar user’s context is much less urgent than the Walmart user’s. The product page does not reveal pricing or unit number. Ingredients are visible here, with simple images that (when scrolled over) provide additional nutritional information.

The anticipated user has more time to peruse, to browse several varieties of product, and to read the delightful descriptions that help them imagine the tastes and textures of the bars.

This user might be very much like the targeted Walmart user but is likely visiting the Larabar website in a different context. This product page offers more immediate information on nutrition and taste, selling to a user who is perhaps hunting for a solution to a dietary restriction or for a healthy snack alternative.

However, the red-boxed “Buy Now” is positioned in a memorable, convenient spot on the page, leaving no guessing for the user, who, after reading a description of this healthy bar full of “rich and creamy flavor,” will likely click it to find out the purchasing options.

With these two pages for (arguably) similar products, we see two completely different ways to structure product details.

Both are effective — for their targeted users. A person seeking gluten-free snacks for a camping trip might be frustrated having to search through the hundreds of granola bar options on Walmart’s website. But they wouldn’t be going there in the first place; they would use a search engine and would find Larabar.

Information hierarchy solves the content-overload challenge that can overshadow the process of constructing a product page, and it is an opportunity to bolster user-centric copy and layout. As mentioned, the key is to gauge the user’s context.

Conclusion

While a user-centric consideration of product pages is not the only way to go, it does provide a focused approach that has appeared to be effective for some pretty successful e-commerce players. Consistency in product pages is key, especially when building a brand’s presence; a reliable guide can ease the writing process. The user-centric method does require some primary research, but this lays a sturdy foundation by which to gauge every bit of content on the page according to how it benefits the user.

As Maciuba-Koppel says, as a content writer or designer, your goal should not be to sell products, but to sell benefits.

Now watch the conversions multiply.

(al) (fi)

References

0
Your rating: None

As the year draws to a close, we asked some A List Apart readers to tell us what they learned about the web in 2011. Together their responses summarize the joys and challenges of this magical place we call the internet. We need to continue to iterate, to embrace change, and challenge complexity to keep shipping. Above all, we must continue to reach out to one another, to teach, to support, to help, and to build the community that sustains us.

0
Your rating: None

Personality is the mysterious force that attracts us to certain people and repels us from others. Because personality greatly influences our decision-making process, it can be a powerful tool in design. In an exclusive excerpt from his spanking new book Designing For Emotion, Aarron Walter shows us how to create a strong human connection in human-computer interaction by turning our design interactions into conversations, imbuing mechanical "interactions" with distinctively human elements, and using design and language techniques to craft a living personality for your website.

0
Your rating: None

How do you define fun on the web? Fun means different things to different people. Debra Levin Gelman says that to create fun, we need to allow users to create, play, and explore. Learn how to help your client define fun, rank its importance on their site, and user test it to create a delightful experience, regardless of whether you're designing for suits and ties or the sandbox crowd.

0
Your rating: None

k

The book presents an international spectrum of interdisciplinary projects at the intersection of laboratory, trade show, and urban space that play with the new frontiers of perception, interaction, and staging created by current technology. The work reveals how technology is fundamentally changing and expanding strategies for the targeted use of architecture, art, communication, and design for the future continue

0
Your rating: None

This is your opportunity to join an A-List team of Casino Gaming Software Developers. Synergy Blue is a gaming software development division of Synergy Information Solutions, an award winning industry expert in gaming vertical systems design and integration. Our environment is full of passionate, creative and intelligent people who want to create the next generation of interactive software! We are putting together a team of the industries best and brightest.

0
Your rating: None