PoetPainter - Thoughts
Monday April 20, 2009 / 5 Comments

The Art and Science of Seductive Interactions

See if any of these scenarios sound familiar:

  • You’ve got a great product, but you can’t seem to get people to stick around long enough see why it’s so great
  • All of the fun built into your application requires some basic registration information, but not enough folks are registering
  • You have a high bounce rate— visitors just aren’t coming back
  • You’re in a crowded market and the nuances that make your service unique are lost on the casual visitor
  • You’re situation involves corporate software, where despite having hostage users, you’ve seen a really low adoption rate

Each of these scenarios point to the same business and user experience problem: How do we get people to stick around long enough to see and evaluate the value we’re offering? Or, to put it more crudely:

How do we get to first base? (with our users!)

This is the topic of my most recent presentation, “The Art and Science of Seductive Interactions,” in which I explore some of the more clever ways sites are leveraging basic human psychology to create what I would describe as “seductive interactions.”

Here’s the formal description from the IA Summit 2009 conference, where I debuted this presentation:

Remember that “percentage complete” feature that LinkedIn implemented a few years ago, and how quickly this accelerated people filling out their profiles? It wasn’t a clever interface, IA, or technical prowess that made this a successful feature– it was basic human psychology. To be good information architects we need to crack open some psych 101 textbooks, learn what motivates people, and then bake these ideas into our designs. We’ve spent the last decade perfecting how to create applications that serve our users needs. Now it’s time to create applications that are engaging. It’s time learn a bit about the art and science of seductive interactions.

We’ll look at specific examples of sites who’ve designed serendipity, arousal, rewards and other seductive elements into their application, especially during the post signup process when it is so easy to lose people. Examples will mostly include consumer applications such as Muxtape, Dopplr and iLike, where engaging with users through a process of playful discovery is vital to continued use; however, we’ll also look at how these same ideas might work in corporate environment, with a glimpse into a few corporate apps that have succeeded at being playful. Regardless of your current project, the psychological principles behind these example can be applied universally. In the spirit of “expanding our boundaries,” we’ll look to disciplines like social sciences, psychology, neuroscience and cognitive science for insights. However, attendees will leave with actionable tools and examples making it easier to bridge theory with tomorrow’s deadline.

As a profession, we talk about mapping user goals to business goals. But what if this focus on goals is no longer enough? And what if we can’t get users to stick around long enough to see the value in our apps? Come get inspired by examples of applications that have moved beyond just goals, and succeeded in both satisfying and delighting people.

I have much more planned for this topic, including the project I hint at beginning on slide 131. But, I’ll stop here and save these thoughts for future posts.

In the meanwhile, enjoy!

Comments closed for this post.



  1. On Apr 24, 05:12 AM michaelw said

    Stephen, your craft and technique are evident both in the presentation and in the ideas you present.

    I hope you will forgive me for being disappointed that your presentation is almost entirely about social sites that are more about finding or defining a niche of users and a corresponding advertising segment.

    It would have been nice to have seen your considerable experience applied to what I will snobbishly call real applications. Gradual disclosure of features is an essential part of a good OOBE and I take to heart your ideas about building the engagement with the user over time.


  2. On Apr 24, 07:07 AM Stephen P. Anderson said

    @Michael – Could you suggest some “real applications” for me? I’d love to test these ideas out in a really challenging context!

    On that note, I’ve been asked about whether these kinds of ideas would work inside an enterprise with something like accounting software or time sheets. My general answer is an emphatic “Yes!” What I’m discussing are essentially human behaviors. I believe if there is a human involved involved in the interaction, then these kinds of things would work (to different degrees or altered for context, of course!).

    As far as the perception that these are slick marketing techniques— yes and no. I’m a designer at heart, meaning I [heart] designing good experiences that are meaningful, useful, enjoyable, etc. (more here ). I strongly oppose anything that smells of a bait and switch! In fact, when I use the “getting to first base” analogy, the end goal isn’t a home run (“Close the deal!”), the end goal is lasting love and devotion— which only happens with product/service experiences that deliver the goods day after day! The unfortunate part of this is that you can have a truly great product that no one will sit down to truly understand before they make up their mind. People in general are hit with too much noise all the time. I don’t think of the ideas I’m discussing as slick marketing— I think of this as optimizing for human behaviors. If we know our product is really, really good, but we’re having trouble communicating that— these ideas are intended to help good product designers/developers ease users into using a new product. When I talk about business goals, I talk about value centered design which is about business AND user value. I’m fond of quoting Peter Drucker who said “there is no business without customers.”

    You can have the most valuable product in the world, but if no one sticks around long enough to realize that— what do you do next? Just offering something of use to someone and gradually revealing features isn’t enough given what we know about attention and decision making.


  3. On Apr 24, 12:43 PM Jeremy Horn said

    Loved the presentation (as well as the creativity behind it). Recommending this article and presentation to my readers for their Weekend Reading…

    http://tpgblog.com/2009/04/24/launching-seduction-twitter/

    Jeremy Horn
    The Product Guy
    http://tpgblog.com


  4. On Apr 24, 11:02 PM michaelw said

    Thank you Stephen for the thoughtful response. My own response did not suffer from brevity and got a post of its own: Anderson’s Law

    I’ve posted this in both our comments


  5. On Apr 26, 12:54 AM Adrian | Rubiqube said

    Great presentation, Stephen! It was a real mind opener!


 

commenting closed for this article

Textile Formatting

_emphasis_
*strong*
??citation??
-deleted text-
+inserted text+
^superscript^

Hyperlink:
"link text":http://link.com/

Image:
!http://image.url!