What are some common pitfalls of the match between system and the real world heuristic?

One good example of matching digital products with the real world is the use of icons. We use magnifiers for show search, we use gears for show settings, and we use a telephone icon to show the call action. If these icons didn't match with our perceptions in real life they were hard to adapt. Especially when they are introduced to the world for the first time. As time passes by next generation might not even know what a telephone looks like but they learned from experience that this specific icon means call.

Heuristic design is vital, making user experience smooth amid complexity. Users should interact intuitively, achieving goals seamlessly. Heuristic design ensures comprehension, use, and joy sans intricate instructions. As designers, we simplify complexity in crafting. Grasping user needs is key. A strong user interface foresees needs and charts a clear design path. Heuristic design births fast learning, error-resistant, efficient products, nurturing user trust. Positive experiences breed loyal customers. Placing users first, embracing heuristic design, steers our process, inspiring the team and meeting user expectations.

As a UX designer, I firmly believe that the match between the system and the real-world heuristic is indispensable. This principle is vital because it simplifies user interaction, making it intuitive and effortless. By aligning the system's language and functionality with users' real-world experiences, we reduce cognitive strain and eliminate the need for extensive learning curves. This approach not only fosters trust but also ensures user satisfaction, as it demonstrates a genuine understanding and respect for users' expectations and preferences. Ultimately, it's the key to crafting user-centric designs that truly resonate with people.

For as long as I can remember, we used the floppy disk icon to denote the action of "saving". I was once talking to a recent 2000s born designer who recently joined my team. She could not associate an icon button with a floppy to "save". After a 30 minute knowledge session where I spoke about floppy disks, we simply ended up using a check mark. Motto: Real world is contextual - it changes with generations of users.

I've found that one of the more common pitfalls is around the expected workflow or user journey - requiring too many steps or combining steps that the user sees as separate concepts leads to user confusion and high cognitive load.

Error handling and error messaging is a great example. Users come across this by mis-clicks, because they weren’t sure what to do, technical bugs, etc. Now what? Did the error message give a 403, 404? Some other number that doesn’t make sense to a user unfamiliar with tech terms? Or did it present a helpful message written in plain, understandable and simple language that allows users to understand what went wrong and how to get back on the so-called happy path? Users want to know what is going on, both positively and negatively. Communicate with your users for all their actions taken. When you press a physical button, flick on a light switch, turn the dial, you expect a reaction to your action. Our technical world should do the same.

1. Excessive Data Collection: Asking for unnecessary or excessive information can make users uncomfortable and decrease conversion rates. 2. Unexpected Actions: Users might be frustrated by buttons or links that trigger important actions unintentionally. 3. Bad Error Messages: Inadequate error messages that don’t explain the problem or how to fix it can demotivate users. 4. Clickable Area Problems: Inadequate, small, or closely positioned clickable areas can reduce usability. 5. Information Overload: Presenting too much information and options on one page can complicate decision-making. 6. Lack of User Testing: Finalizing a product or design without testing users’ real-world experiences can harm usability.

Navigating the match between system and the real world heuristic can be tricky due to several common pitfalls. One challenge lies in the usage of jargon, acronyms, or technical terms unfamiliar to users, leading to confusion. Inconsistencies in metaphors or icons, especially concerning cultural contexts, can also disrupt comprehension. Additionally, formats, units, labels, or categories that don't align with users' expectations can hinder understanding. Furthermore, feedback that is either too vague or overly detailed fails to guide users effectively, posing yet another obstacle. Addressing these pitfalls is crucial in ensuring a seamless and user-friendly experience, requiring careful consideration and adaptation in the design process.

The way I do the heuristic evaluation is by using specific checklists that I gathered from multiple resources. In this checklist, each heuristic has multiple topics and steps underneath it. I'll check the points and when I see a problem I'll add a note in front of the issue to do a redesign on it. One of the best resources for creating your checklist is NNg articles about heuristic evaluations.

The first paragraph is true about heuristic evaluation but the second one is about user testing and it shouldn't be confused with the heuristic evaluation. The main point of heuristic evaluation is the fact that it is done by actual experts using multiple checklists and this process happens before the user study. The user study is for understanding specific and special use cases of the digital product and it is time-consuming and expensive so it shouldn't be used for heuristic evaluation which UX experts have exact knowledge of them.