Intellectual Bargain Shopping, by Jeffrey Veen

Intellectual Bargain Shopping

Steve Mulder was giving a presentation on user behavior at Web Design World in Seattle this morning when he popped up this awesome quote in a slide:

To predict the behavior of ordinary people in advance, you only have to assume that they will always try to escape a disagreeable situation with the smallest possible expenditure of intelligence.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

Still, to this day, I am presented with the tired old argument that "users are stupid" -- that the hubris of developers and designers somehow trumps investment in usable products.

I love how this quote turns the tables. Users aren't stupid, they're efficient. They're spending the least amount of effort (i.e. intelligence) as they possible can on each step of the goal they're trying to achieve. If you make them spend more, they'll go somewhere else -- it's like intellectual bargain shopping.

This helps explain simple anomalies in user behavior at your site. Why do people search for terms that are listed right in the navigation? Because it's easier to type the word you want than pick it out of a list. Why do users send support email asking question answered in the help section? It's easier!

They're not stupid. They're not lazy. Don't treat them that way.

This entry was written by Jeffrey Veen and posted 10 July 2006 at 6:46 PM. It was filed under Web Design.

Comments

1. On 11 July 2006 at 11:43 AM vanderwal wrote:

One of the reasons I stopped using the term user and make "person" or "people" the focus of actions. People have rational reasons and trigger empathy, users just get the blame.

2. On 11 July 2006 at 4:50 PM Derek Powazek wrote:

I've always believed that sites get the users they deserve. Treat your users like idiots, and you'll get idiots for users. But treat your users like intelligent people, and intelligent people is what you'll get.

3. On 11 July 2006 at 7:23 PM William Bakker wrote:

I really like the quote, and I agree with your "stupid user" comment. But then again, Nietzsche also said "Horrible experiences lead us to wonder whether the person who experiences them might not be something horrible." Is there such thing as online karma?

4. On 13 July 2006 at 7:18 AM fred wrote:

This is why sitting behind people (not users - great point, Thomas) and learn from their patterns (instead of our assumptions of their patterns) is probably the best learning experience about our own products.

5. On 13 July 2006 at 1:04 PM Zephyr wrote:

Then again, Nietzsche calls them 'ordinary people'. Is he talking about the people not-in-the-know? Some separation between himself/intellectuals and the rest? Designers/developers and the rest?

6. On 14 July 2006 at 6:41 AM donna wrote:

It's all so 'don't make me think'...

7. On 14 July 2006 at 3:56 PM Eric wrote:

I wrote a blog post a few months ago that defends users' intelligence and expands on the basic idea here that users are efficient.

I'd love to know what you think about the post:
http://blog.buildv1.com/article/2/your-users-arent-stupid

I think more web designers would realize that users aren't stupid if they watched people use the web in an unstructured way.

8. On 15 July 2006 at 11:25 AM Suzanne Carter-Jackson wrote:

This strikes a chord with me, thank you. I've grown weary of listening to the "if they are too stupid to find x, y or z, then we don't want their business" excuse for poor design.

I think it's a great failure to understand people and to meet the needs of the people who are using your service (either as a buyer or a contributor or any other interaction).

The reaction of choosing to silence, censor, block or obfuscate the "undesirable" behaviour speaks to a need to control and force arbitrary compliance instead of using that behaviour as a starting point to understand the person's goal in using your site.

Requiring the people who interact with your site to learn the site culture and quirks before they commit to using your site (especially after being alerted to the issues) is an especially egregious arrogance. There is something to be said for people committing some effort on their own to learn what it is they are participating in, yes. But when the cues for them to learn this are hidden, or require a significant upfront investment in energy (intelligence), I think any negative fallout from your design choices is your own, not a reflection on the person trying to engage with your content or service.

If someone misunderstands me, are they stupid, or did I fail to express myself clearly? I prefer to put the onus on myself.

9. On 16 July 2006 at 5:24 AM Vini wrote:

In some extense, some website creators are stupid to think people should understand what they have in mind.

10. On 17 July 2006 at 2:06 AM David wrote:

when the cues for them to learn this are hidden

11. On 17 July 2006 at 5:17 AM Ordinary guy wrote:

I don't disagree with any of the comments here... but the quote seems to say "ordinary people are intellectually lazy"... which sounds about right

12. On 17 July 2006 at 6:36 AM T wrote:

@11 (Ordinary Guy),

We are all lazy in different situations. I could not care less about cars or car maintenance details. I'm sure the mechanics and guys at Jiffy Lube think I'm "intellectually lazy". But when it comes to computers, I am happy to dive into the details and push my mind.

13. On 18 July 2006 at 10:22 AM Stephen wrote:

For a related concept, check out Herbert Simon's concept of "satisficing." See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satisficing

14. On 20 July 2006 at 1:44 AM James John Malcolm (AkaXakA) wrote:

But, but, but....we can't go blaming _ourselves_ can we?

We need stupid users!

15. On 21 July 2006 at 3:10 AM EMMANUEL ANNI wrote:

WELL, CONVINIENCE IS ALWAYS EXPENSIVE, BUT SO EXHAUSTING IS THINKING IN AN AREA YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN

16. On 21 July 2006 at 8:38 AM John Whittet wrote:

@ It's all so 'don't make me think'...

I'm sure it's what you're hinting at, but for those of you who don't know, this is the point raised in Steve Krug's usability book entitled "Don't Make Me Think!" (A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability).

A highly suggested read.

17. On 24 July 2006 at 2:47 PM Chris Coyier wrote:

It's truly a great skill to design a website that is both:
- Easy to use even for the inexperienced
- Not offensive to the experienced

Usually you can strike a decent balance, but it's more important to understand your audience and cater to that instead of the lowest common denominator.

Take for example a webmail interface. I could build one with huge easy to read buttons with obvious functions and I could make sure to not clutter up the window with strange sidebars with tons of links in a tiny font. That might work pretty well in getting my grandmother to give email a shot. But the second my mother signs up for it and can't find where you click to set up a family mailing list, she will get frustrated and use something else.

18. On 25 July 2006 at 6:52 AM wrote:

"I think more web designers would realize that users aren't stupid if they watched people use the web in an unstructured way." -Eric, 14 July 2006 at 3:56 PM

i've learned valuable insight in personal online experience while watching my mom trying to use the web.

19. On 27 July 2006 at 2:54 PM Martin wrote:

Chris Coyier (#17) nailed it. It's really difficult to design for experts as well as neophytes. A good blog about this subject is called [Creating Passionate Users](http://headrush.typepad.com/).

As an aside, please consider allowing [Markdown](http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/) in your comments.