Designing for Humans: Why UX needs more than just Data and Research Methods
We research, design and optimize for our users, but are we truly designing for humans or merely optmizing for surface-level usability?
As user experience designers we spent a lot of time researching consumer behaviors, motivations, and needs to create innovative products and experiences. We have virtually limitless data, new technologies popping up every day and all kinds of rigorous research methodologies literally at our fingertips. We are just one click away from new information. However, my guess is that only a small portion of the UX designers, companies, and consultants who busy themselves with user behavior, have ever looked further into the topics of human psychology, philosophy, or behavioral science. You might wonder why we should bother since the methodologies we use nowadays have been built upon those research insights someone else gathered in the past.
Let me ask you something… Have you ever tried playing the guitar? The concept is easy enough to understand. One hand holds specific strings, and the other hand strums or picks the strings. So you should be good to go to play the guitar, but it will probably sound awful. In most cases, we can understand the concept of something and use it or apply it, but without understanding the underlying mechanics we most likely won’t be able to master it or execute something properly.
That applies to everything in life. Even if you have never driven a car but have been a passenger many times, you will be familiar with the concept, as well as some rules and signs. Yet driving yourself, knowing how to react in certain situations, and don’t get me started — figuring out how to use clutch and gas without stalling, will be beyond your grasp without learning more about it and trying it out yourself.
Many of the fundamental truths about how humans think, feel and act were researched by the great minds of psychology, philosophy, and other fields. So, instead of acting as if we knew everything, why not set our pride aside and use these insights to develop a deeper, more comprehensive understanding of the human experience?
Let’s have a look at some of those theories, shall we?
The Origins of Emotion
One of the most important aspects of designing great experiences is to evoke specific emotions from customers at specific moments of their journey. Some of the theories on emotions provide great insights on how we can achieve this.
The James-Lange theory from the 19th century proposed that emotions happen as a result of physiological reactions to events. An event triggers a bodily reaction (arousal), we then interpret that reaction, which leads to an emotion. For example, you hear an object fall in your house at night (event), your heart starts racing and you begin to tremble (bodily response), then you interpret these physiological changes as fear (emotion) of a burglar breaking into your home.
Event → Arousal → Interpretation → Emotion
This theory has been criticized by many, but according to other researchers, the James-Lange theory is hard to disprove entirely (George et al., 2002).
The Cannon-Bard theory presented an alternative, where the physiological arousal and the emotion occur simultaneously.
Event → Arousal & Emotion
More recently, the Schachter and Singer two-factor theory combined elements of James-Lange and Cannon-Bard theories. They proposed that in order to feel an emotion, a person must both feel a physiological arousal and label the arousal based on their evaluation of the event (interpret what the arousal means).
Event → Arousal + Cognition → Emotion
Built upon the earlier work, the Richard Lazarus theory of emotion follows a different approach to understanding how emotions occur. Richard Lazarus proposed that the initial interpretation of an event determines the emotion and arousal. So the emotion is determined by evaluating the personal significance or meaning of an event.
Event → Evaluation/Thought → Emotion & Arousal
With our previous burglar example, it would look like this:
1. You hear an object fall in your house at night (event)
2. You evaluate the event (it could be a burglar)
3. You feel fear (Emotion) and your heart starts racing (Arousal) simultaneously
If you had a cat that constantly throws things from the kitchen counter, you might evaluate the event differently, which could lead to a different emotion and arousal.
The last theory includes another part of the question ‘How do emotions form?’. When we evaluate an event, consciously or subconsciously, we use our existing beliefs, memories, personal contexts, learned associations, and past experiences. This is why the same event can lead to completely different emotional responses across individuals based on their unique backgrounds, experiences, and worldviews.
While the ordering differs across these theories, they provide great insights for designers and companies to deeply consider all aspects of an experience: Circumstances and situation, personal relevance, evaluation factors, bodily sensations, and interpretations.
Needs Driving Experiences
To design and create great experiences we also need to understand what drives consumers to pursue certain experiences and what shapes their behavior. While it can be complicated for us humans to interpret our emotions, most of us know what our core needs, values, and motivations are.
One of the better-known and most influential theories was outlined by Abraham Maslow. He was an American psychologist who developed the hierarchy of needs to explain human motivation.
At the bottom are the basic needs for survival like air, food, water, and sleep. The next level up is safety needs like security, protection, and stability. Once those lower-level needs are met, we move up to the third level of psychological needs like the need for love, belongingness, affection, being part of a group, as well as esteem needs like the need for achievement, status, self-respect, and respect from others. The last and top part is about the need for self-actualization — realizing one’s full potential, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.
Later on, other researchers proposed additional categories. David McClelland added the need for achievement, affiliation, and power over others. Henry Murray identified additional psychogenic needs like defense (protecting the self), deference (serving others), autonomy, counteraction (overcoming obstacles), and play (engaging in enjoyable activities).
Having a closer look at these theories will help us understand the intrinsic human desires that lead to specific purchase decisions and preferences. With those needs in mind, we can serve them better and level up our consumer experience. For example, Lululemon doesn’t just sell sportswear, they use the need of self-actualization by creating a community around mindfulness, personal growth, and healthy living. Some Gamification tactics also serve our needs for achievement and recognition.
You might find that your product or experience can also tap into more human needs than the one it is currently serving.
Designing for Impactful Change
Many of the products, offers, and experiences out there intend to help people adopt new habits, make a change in their lives, or shift existing mindsets. The reality is that the majority of those companies and their products fail to create a lasting impact. Going to the gym, losing weight through a diet, learning something new — People want to do these things, they buy the membership, the courses, and apps. However, old habits and ingrained mindsets are incredibly sticky — sometimes life comes in the way, the first motivational spike ebbs and their good intentions are thrown overboard. Studies have shown that most people go back to previous patterns within a short timeframe as motivation wanes and reality sets in. So shouldn’t we try to understand the deeper psychological frameworks around how beliefs and other factors influence our behavior?
Albert Ellis’ ABC Model provides a look into this. While the model is a technique used in psychotherapy, we can also apply it in our design processes. The technique is used to help individuals reshape their negative thoughts and feelings positively.
The model states that an activating event (A) leads to a particular belief (B), which then drives the consequences (C) of an emotional response and a behavioral outcome.
Ellis later on expanded his model to the ABCDE model adding D for disputation of beliefs and E for effects. Disputation of beliefs stands for identifying, reviewing, and challenging the limiting beliefs, which is required for mental change to take place. The goal is for the disputation to lead to E the effect — creating a new narrative and belief that guides more desirable behavioral outcomes.
When we experience something negative, the first thing we often do is try to find an explanation for why this happened. Our beliefs about the reasons for the situation determine our reaction.
For example, a person might not get an interview at the company they applied for (A), which triggers the belief “I’m not good enough” (B), resulting in disappointment and demotivation (C). But reframing it as a temporary challenge (D) allows them to adopt a more constructive mindset (E) of treating it as a growth opportunity to improve their resume and interviewing skills.
By understanding this cognitive process, experience designers can design interventions and tactics to reshape unhelpful beliefs and instill more empowering mindsets.
Moving on from Ellis’ cognition-focused model on how our beliefs can influence and change our behavior to Prochaska’s Transtheoretical Model, which outlines the process of attempting lasting behavior change. Also called the stages of change model which encompasses five stages:
1. Pre-contemplation (No intention to change/not ready to change)
2. Contemplation (Considering change)
3. Preparation (Planning to change/Ready to change)
4. Action (actively changing/modifying habits)
5. Maintenance (continuing and sustaining the new behavior)
6. Termination (permanent and stable change)
These stages highlight the long journey someone undertakes when attempting a behavior change. To help someone make a lasting change, experiences must provide varying levels of support, tools, and motivations that are aligned with a person’s current stage to support them in moving on to the next stage.
By leveraging frameworks around the cognitive and emotional factors driving behaviors, experience designers can craft solutions for real impact.
At the end of the day, we are still creating experiences for humans, and their behaviors are shaped by the same fundamental needs, cognitive patterns, and motivations that have existed long before we used the term Experience Design. No matter how well our research and design processes are crafted, there is always more to learn. By learning and using the research and wisdom of the great minds across psychology, philosophy, behavioral science, and other fields, we can gain invaluable perspectives into the human mind.
So the next time you are using UX frameworks and best practices, it might be worth looking into the underlying theories to gain a deeper understanding and perfect your skills.
References:
Lange, C. G., & James, W. (Eds.). (1922). The emotions, Vol. 1. Williams & Wilkins Co. https://doi.org/10.1037/10735-000
Cannon, W. B. (1927). The James-Lange theory of emotions: a critical examination and an alternative theory. The American Journal of Psychology, 39, 106–124. https://doi.org/10.2307/1415404
SCHACHTER, S., & SINGER, J. E. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological review, 69, 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046234
S. Lazarus, Richard (1991). Emotion and Adaptation. Oxford University Press USA.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
McClelland, D.C. (1961). The achieving society. Van Nostrand.
Murray, H.A. (1938). Explorations in personality. Oxford Univ. Press.
Kleinman P. K. (2012). Psych 101 : psychology facts basics statistics tests and more! 264–270. Adams Media.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 390–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.51.3.390
