Conversation

"Not designing for addiction" isn't possible. Design guidelines are for creating visual habituation at the very least. The line between: (this + a "delightful" experience) and (addiction) is so thin.
Quote Tweet
In other words, in life, not just UX: designing to streamline visual norms or processes so that they require less cognitive effort (and thus begin to form habits), is simultaneously natural AND a slippery slope to designing _for_ negative addictive patterns
Show this thread
5
34
Call to cognitive sciences / neuroscience people: What would you say are some scientific principles to consider when attempting to delineate between pleasant/delightful design with low friction and a negatively addictive design?
1
6
Replying to
what does it mean for something to be outside of design? isn't social context part of the design process? Surely it's possible to establish some- any guiding principles other than "don't design addictively" even if they aren't universal
2
Replying to
Not if it’s too far outside the scope. When you design a syringe are you going to make it easy to use for good drugs, hard to use for cocaine? There’s a point beyond which the designed artifact is simply the top of a societal pattern that is both dark and light.
Replying to and
The conceit of ethical design is that designers own the entire scope of use of a tool. They don’t. Governance is not a UI problem and it is autocratic to act like it is. You’re not going to resolve gun violence with biometric grips for example. You have to debate 2nd amendment.
1
4
Replying to
imo, these are both good points but a little far in the extreme to speak to what i'm talking about i think. instagram, for ex: its piece in the puzzle of addiction is much bigger than a syringe. It's not merely part of societal patterns - it has served a part in creating them
1
1
Show replies