Funny things happen when people express their feelings about a design. In the endeavor to create a successful design, designers must solve problems that happen along the way. In order to identify problems, attention must be paid to the user. There’s two ways to do this. One: observe yourself as you try to use it. Two: observe others as they try to use it.

Both approaches are valid, but it’s worth pointing out that attemping to observe yourself, while using something, can be tricky. It’s like trying to give yourself a haircut. Giving someone else a haircut is much easier. Observing others may give you clues you might otherwise miss if you only observe yourself. Though a great advantage of self-observation is that it only requires you, not others. You are always available to observe yourself. This convenience more or less cancels out the other inconvenience. That leads me to believe that one approach is just as good as the other.

When problems occur in design, dissatisfaction is the result. That’s what makes problems problematic! Dissatisfaction is undesirable. We want the user to be satisfied. We have to observe the user to see if everything is in order.

You could simply ask the user whether the user is happy with the product. At this point, we have to give ourselves a reminder that users are humans. And humans, are, in fact, complicated. Because of that, the process is complicated. For example, when you ask the user something, only a part of the user will answer the question. If you want to ask the user proper; too bad. The user does not speak on behalf of the user. The user only speaks on behalf of the conscious part of the user. That’s why asking questions isn’t good enough.

To make matters worse, when users express themselves in words, the words they choose may lead to confusion.

Shit My User Says

Let’s imagine a person testing a video game. After a bit of playing, the person might say something like “You know, I think I would like this game more if (a particular element of the game was changed like such and so). Now let’s imagine you take those words at face value (yikes) and actually implement those changes (double yikes). The same person tries out the game again with the changes that were made. Instead of seeing this person enjoy the game more, you now begin to hear other complaints. You might even hear more complaints than before!

This one I like to call The Helpful Complaint. You see, some people hesitate to complain, because they feel that by complaining, other people will think of them as being unpleasant. Instead of expressing dissatisfaction outright, they try to express themselves more diplomatically, leading to The Helpful Complaint. This is actually very much unhelpful, because it can lead the designer down the wrong path. Ironically, that same person could later exhibit the very behavior they had hoped to avoid (complaining outright) because changes were made in such a way that made things worse, making it harder to resist such behavior.

You could look at this episode and think testing may not be worth the trouble, and perhaps avoid such a test. But there’s no avoiding trouble in the design process.

Let’s turn this around and imagine a game where the user is having a blast. If the reason for your observation was to identify problems, then you may not be inclined to ask why they are having so much fun, as there wouldn’t be any problems. Suppose you do ask the question out of curiosity. The response could be something like: “Well, I like this game so much because of (element of the game)”.

But they could be wrong about that. They probably are wrong, and will likely point out a salient feature of the design, rather than a feature that is unseen. Pinpointing which element of design is responsible for what result is hard enough for a designer, let alone a user. That’s important to remember when interpreting feedback.

Nice Feedback

Imagine this interaction.

So um… what do you think?

Yeah, I like it. It’s nice.

You think so?

It’s awesome! You did a great job.

That last sentence should set alarm bells ringing in your head. In your attempt to get feedback, the user seems more concerned with your feelings than the product. Instead of giving proper feedback, the user is trying to be nice. It’s as good as zero feedback. No, it’s worse! Taking the user at their word here would lead you to believe that everything is in order, when in fact the design could suffer from major issues. In their attempt to be nice, the user ends up being dangerously misleading.

Unconstructive Feedback

And then there are people who do not care about your feelings.

I dunno, man. This game just kinda sucks.

I would suggest to resist the urge to outright dismiss such feedback. You might look back at this moment later and discover something about when and where it was said, that might ultimately yield an interesting clue. Think of it as latent feedback.

Straight shooters are probably the preferred type of user to have when trying to get feedback, even when it’s not always constructive. It feels refreshing when it is constructive; a respite from the travails of design. It can almost feel like you’ve gained an assistant.

On some rare occasions, I would read a comment on some internet forum, or maybe even a YouTube comment, where someone would say a thing would be better if it were like such and so, and I would find myself nodding in agreement, before being startled at the accuracy of the remark.

Exactly… it would be better if—wait, how the hell did you know that?

Target of Ire

Trying to be helpful or nice while ultimately being misleading, being unconstructive… these are not things you will do as a designer. Self-observation, despite its difficulties, is not so bad after all. Yet there are unhelpful behaviors that designers themselves cannot escape from, no matter how experienced they are.

The form of expressing dissastisfaction that I call the Target of Ire is my favorite, because it’s the most interesting. It’s the most interesting because it affects users and designers equally.

If something’s amiss, you feel dissatisfied and will want to point out the culprit. Finding the culprit is not easy. That means you could be off the mark when you point your finger at something. The only way to know whether you are right or wrong, is to change, or ‘fix’ that thing. If you turn out to be wrong, it means it wasn’t the culprit.

The trouble here is that salient elements of a design make for irresistible targets for you to point your finger at. It can be extremely amusing how wildly off the mark you can be. Despite the understanding of how much heavy lifting the unseen elements do, the urge to point your finger at a salient design element is enormous. In that case, the way you go about it is not like a knowledgeable designer, but like an ordinary user!

Magnet of Ire

Now this is where things really get crazy. After having blamed the wrong thing, the element you thought to be responsible continues to draw your ire.

Even after you are fully aware it is not the culprit.

What!?

Somehow, elements can exist in a design that are easy to hate. You know it’s not the culprit, but you can’t help point your finger at it anyway. The element is seemingly magnetized to draw your ire, becoming a target of ire even after having been cleared of all wrongdoing.

Man, fuck that guy.

But he didn’t do anything…?

Well, fuck him anyway!