3 ms·

I'd say to forget about apologising when the user was at fault and tell them what they can do to resolve it. No need to turn it into a personalised essay. For

I'd say to forget about apologising when the user was at fault and tell them what they can do to resolve it. No need to turn it into a personalised essay. For example, you could say: "I'm sorry you cannot delete this document" A better message may be: "You cannot delete this document when someone else is viewing it" and even better may be: "You cannot delete this document when someone else is viewing it. Click here to see who is viewing this document". If you want to apologise when the user does something wrong, then build software that doesn't cause the user to generate an error situation in the first place. By apologising you are supporting the fact that it was okay for the user to do what they did or that they were treated unfairly, when it isn't, because the user still can't do it. If the user wasn't to blame, then by all means apologise and reassure them that the issue will be addressed. Also clearly explain what the expectations are from now on, such as, loss of data. That's my take on it, and I wont be apologising for that. But if you want to know whether you should apologise or not, you need to do some usability testing and see if it has any impact on the goals of the software and the user experience.

eli 14y ago
Sure, including more information is going to be better, but that wasn't the question.
zaidf 14y ago
The word sorry has multiple meanings, including: regrettable or deplorable; unfortunate; sympathy It does not automatically mean to be an apology. In these cases, I am pretty sure users don't see it as one either. I always saw it as more sympathy than an apology. As for telling users what they can do to resolve it, sure but they are not mutually exclusive. You can still say "Sorry, you cannot delete this document when someone else is viewing it".
mcgwiz 14y ago
Agreed. Users care more about getting the task done then having an emotional relationship with the system. To inject sympathy into what need only be informative/instructive, is to call attention to the user's ignorance in fabricating false expectations of the system. That's more offensive than anything else. Only in the case of the system inadvertently failing to meet the expectations it made (e.g. database server inaccessible) would apologetic messaging be considered.

eli 14y ago

Sure, including more information is going to be better, but that wasn't the question.

zaidf 14y ago

The word sorry has multiple meanings, including: regrettable or deplorable; unfortunate; sympathy It does not automatically mean to be an apology. In these cases, I am pretty sure users don't see it as one either. I always saw it as more sympathy than an apology. As for telling users what they can do to resolve it, sure but they are not mutually exclusive. You can still say "Sorry, you cannot delete this document when someone else is viewing it".

mcgwiz 14y ago

Agreed. Users care more about getting the task done then having an emotional relationship with the system. To inject sympathy into what need only be informative/instructive, is to call attention to the user's ignorance in fabricating false expectations of the system. That's more offensive than anything else. Only in the case of the system inadvertently failing to meet the expectations it made (e.g. database server inaccessible) would apologetic messaging be considered.