You actually understood exactly what we tried to achieve with that progressive disclosure and management of cognitive load ;). It's the #1 positive feedback we get from the people who use this page.
We did quite a bit of user research with different cohorts of people before we released this list. We originally considered auto-closing the other panels when you open a new one (!), but beta testers mentioned that it was convenient to compare two elements or to Ctrl-F through some stuff that saw a few tiles back.
So I guess we had the same thought process, but our beta tester descoped that need for us. So we launched that MVP without it.
I'll definitely keep an eye on the feedback (and comment section) if more people raise that concern.
We intend to update that page regularly.
Cheers!
PS: One of the UX hacks that I added though is scrolling back to the top of your active tile when you close it to avoid losing your anchor. With that said, even that was a bit limit for my JS skills (I'm far from a dev, merely a curious person).
That's very kind, thanks Drew! :) Since we're only two indie hackers, honestly it was an insane amount of work to map the product examples and design the page.
It's a good thing we found the work of Buster Benson a few days before we published. That allows us to split the biases in the four categories that he found. (Buster deserves a MAJOR kudos for that. His research summary was brilliant.)
Thanks James! And thanks for sharing 31337. Never heard of ScholarPedia, just took a look. I know what James was referring to (a list of biases), but I couldn't find that on ScholarPedia. I also tried a dozen queries with individual cognitive biases and couldn't find most. Is there a sub-category that I missed?
Scholarpedia works differently than Wikipedia for searches. You need to figure the categories for each since they are mostly academic writings. For individual cognitive biases, You can have a look at
Behavioral Operations by Stephanie Eckerd and Elliot Bendoly
" In particular, cognitive psychology addresses (among other things) an individual's decision-making biases and use of heuristics as an attempt to overcome bounded rationality. "
100% Abdullah. Behavioral psychology should be used for good.
We've been in touch with Nir Eyal for a bit now. He wrote "Hooked", but quickly realized that the ethical side of behavioral psychology was misunderstood completely and started to focus his efforts there.
We asked him for a quote because we believe this is extremely important (just Ctrl-F "Eyal" on the page you should find it).
We also really like his "regret test" regarding the ethical side of behavioral design. It comes down to answering: "If users knew everything the product designer knows, would they still execute the intended behavior? Are they likely to regret doing this?"
Side note: As for us, we don't believe in "growth for the sake of growth". We define "growth by design" as a process at the intersection of Growth (a scientific method to improve) and Design (a human-centered process used to solve problems). It involves crafting meaningful experiences at scale so that an organization can exceed its business goals while delighting their customers. We talk about this and our vision on our /about page if you're interested!
On that note, you make me realize we should probably add something regarding this in the conclusion. Great idea, cheers Abdullah!
> He wrote "Hooked", but quickly realized that the ethical side of behavioral psychology was misunderstood
That’s a charitable interpretation. He wrote a book about how to make products addictive (subtitle: How To Make Habit-Forming Products), then when the inevitable backlash came he got on that bandwagon and wrote a book to teach people how to be Indistractable (in a world filled with products designed to be habit-forming).
Yeah, Kahneman is a legend in that area indeed. Huge influence in the behavioral sphere. Another nice read (althought much lighter) that is covering many biases as well is "You are not so smart" and "Super Thinking" (already linked in the article).
We don't have any product to sell :/. We've been creating case studies for 15 months for people in 120 countries. All for free. The community has been asking us to build more even though we're strapped for time. The only way we could make that happen is if we start a premium subscription for those interested (but keep a foundation of free content of course).
Premium subscriptions are your product. If that's not something you're comfortable being honest about, I question the depth of your domain expertise in the areas for which your seeking "donations" to support.
Pretty much. I suspect I may be a minority, but I'd rather just have a really good case study in text format, with images where appropriate, rather than having to keep clicking through with cute visuals.
It feels to me a bit like it's cheapening the content by putting it into that context. It's like watching an anime version of Pride and Prejudice; I'm sure there's an audience for it, but I'm not it, and it feels cheap.
EDIT
Having thought about this a little more, it also feels like the analysis is more shallow than I think it actually is, due to the presentation context.
Sure thing! Totally respect your opinion Pete. I really believe in radical candor.
To give a bit of context, most people signup for our content specifically for the case study format (including, surprisingly, Fortune 500 execs). Tech scale-up product leaders tend to use it as a resource for internal education. (They tend to use the keyboard navigation though, not their mouse, the clicking is indeed tedious!)
With that said, we also know that many people prefer long form text—which is totally fine. The good news is that there's no shortage of Medium posts for that!
Oh that's odd. Are you referring to /case-studies/tinder-monetization/ ? It is visible on my side (incognito mode)… I'll look into it. Thanks for the heads up.
On one of the slides it says "Great use of my first name" when in fact it uses the whole name or whatever was given in the name field. Since you are here, why did you write "first name" when "name" would be more precise?
We have a raw database with many more principles, examples and tags, but we have yet to find a scalable way to share them.