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.
1
5
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.
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
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Show replies