Teaching Users to Read

I’ve talked about irresponsible use of dialog boxes before, but a few pages I’ve read recently highlighted an interesting aspect of this topic that I hadn’t considered. First, Joel Spolsky:

This may sound a little harsh, but you’ll see, when you do usability tests, that there are quite a few users who simply do not read words that you put on the screen. If you pop up an error box of any sort, they simply will not read it. This may be disconcerting to you as a programmer, because you imagine yourself as conducting a dialog with the user. Hey, user! You can’t open that file, we don’t support that file format! Still, experience shows that the more words you put on that dialog box, the fewer people will actually read it.

And Mike Pope dug up a fascinating Eric Lippert comment on the same topic:

It’s not that users are morons or that they “forget” to think. It’s that users are trained to not think. Users very quickly learn from experience that:

Dialog boxes are modal. But users do not think of them as “modal,” they think of them as “preventing me from getting any work done until I get rid of them.”

Dialog boxes almost always go away when you click the leftmost or rightmost button.

Dialog boxes usually say “If you want to tech the tech, you need to tech the tech with the teching tech tech. Tech the tech? Yes / No.”

If you press one of those buttons, something happens. If you press the other one, nothing happens. Very few users want nothing to happen – in the majority of cases, whatever happens is what the user wanted to happen. Only in rare cases does something bad happen.

In short, from a user perspective, dialog boxes are impediments to productivity which provide no information. It’s like giving shocks or food pellets to monkeys when they press buttons – primates very quickly learn what gives them the good stuff and avoids the bad.

Well, I couldn’t help thinking of this classic Gary Larson strip:

What Dogs Hear

My intent is not to make fun of users, but to illustrate that there are far more effective ways to communicate with your dog. Essentially, any time you’re asking the user to make a choice they don’t care about, you have failed the user. Well designed software takes care of “teching the tech tech” all by itself, and leaves the user free to worry about things relevant to the work they are doing. Dialog boxes are almost always detrimental. The goal should be to write an entire application free of dialog boxes.

Well designed software avoids asking the user questions by...

  • Anticipating user needs (wizards, templates, autocomplete, IUI)
  • Remembering past preferences and using that to better anticipate future needs
  • Silently and automatically protecting the user from the consequences of any negative actions (versioning, undo)

It’s amazing how few software packages even try to meet these goals, even with simple, common things. For example, why does the file save dialog always default to My Documents even though I saved to Desktop the last time I used the application?

Related posts

Because Reading is Fundamental

Because Reading is Fundamental

Most discussions show a bit of information next to each user: What message does this send? * The only number you can control printed next to your name is post count. * Everyone who reads this will see your current post count. * The more you post, the bigger that number next to

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments

The “Just In Time” Theory of User Behavior

I’ve long believed that the design of your software has a profound impact on how users behave within your software. But there are two sides to this story: * Encouraging the “right” things by making those things intentionally easy to do. * Discouraging the “wrong” things by making those things intentionally

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments

For a Bit of Colored Ribbon

For the last year or so, I've been getting these two page energy assessment reports in the mail from Pacific Gas & Electric, our California utility company, comparing our household's energy use to those of the houses around us. Here's the relevant excerpts from

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments

Are You a Digital Sharecropper?

Will Work for Praise: The Web's Free-Labor Economy [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2008-12-28/will-work-for-praise-the-webs-free-labor-economybusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice] describes how many of today's websites are built by the users themselves: > It's dawn at a Los Angeles apartment overlooking the Hollywood Hills. Laura Sweet, an advertising

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments

Recent Posts

Stay Gold, America

Stay Gold, America

We are at an unprecedented point in American history, and I'm concerned we may lose sight of the American Dream.

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments
The Great Filter Comes For Us All

The Great Filter Comes For Us All

With a 13 billion year head start on evolution, why haven’t any other forms of life in the universe contacted us by now? (Arrival is a fantastic movie. Watch it, but don’t stop there – read the Story of Your Life novella it was based on for so much

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments
I Fight For The Users

I Fight For The Users

If you haven’t been able to keep up with my blistering pace of one blog post per year, I don’t blame you. There’s a lot going on right now. It’s a busy time. But let’s pause and take a moment to celebrate that Elon Musk

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments
The 2030 Self-Driving Car Bet

The 2030 Self-Driving Car Bet

It’s my honor to announce that John Carmack and I have initiated a friendly bet of $10,000* to the 501(c)(3) charity of the winner’s choice: By January 1st, 2030, completely autonomous self-driving cars meeting SAE J3016 level 5 will be commercially available for passenger use

By Jeff Atwood ·
Comments