4 ms·

Very interesting. One question: > The new design was faster. There was less screens with simpler choices. It went from a 'pick one of 5' to a 'heres the defaul

Very interesting. One question: > The new design was faster. There was less screens with simpler choices. It went from a 'pick one of 5' to a 'heres the default, would you like to change it?'. Was it just the speed that made a difference? If you're just going from "pick one of 5" to "pick one of 5 but there's a default", I wouldn't expect one or the other to be "faster". Was the new design more different than that? As for the rest, I think the beneficial features of the design are predicted by nudge theory. "Providing a credible default reduces cognitive load and confusion on the path to a decision, as the user can just trust the defaults have been set up reasonably" has always been the theory for why nudges work.

JusticeJuice 4y ago
The first version was a screen with 5 choices, and detail about each choice that you'd have to scroll through. The second version was a simple "We've set this up for you" screen with two options, continue or customise. If you hit customise, you'd get shown the original five choice screen. What I mean by it being faster is you could get to the next step of the process with both reading less text, and seeing less choices (just two buttons not 5). Cause if you just slapped the continue button (which most people did), you'd skip the whole explanation of all the choices.