Takeaway

People perceive attractive products as easier to use; aesthetics can mask usability issues—or buy you goodwill to fix them.

The problem (before → after)

  • Before: Teams prioritize functionality and ignore visual design.
  • After: Use aesthetics intentionally to improve perceived and actual usability, while validating with user tests.

Mental model first

Like a well-plated meal: presentation sets expectations and affects perceived taste, even when ingredients are the same.

Just-in-time concepts

  • Affect and trust: aesthetics influence patience and error tolerance.
  • Visual hierarchy guides attention and reduces cognitive load.
  • Consistency and whitespace improve scannability.

First-pass solution

Establish a design system; apply hierarchy, contrast, spacing; test tasks for both time-on-task and satisfaction.

Iterative refinement

  1. Dark/light modes and accessibility.
  2. Motion and micro-interactions for feedback.
  3. Measure with SUS/UMUX-Lite and qualitative feedback.

Principles, not prescriptions

  • Form supports function; don’t let beauty hide flaws.

Common pitfalls

  • Polishing over poor IA; neglecting accessibility.

Connections and contrasts

  • See also: [/blog/paradox-of-choice], [/blog/mere-exposure-effect].

Quick checks

  1. Does beauty help? — Yes, by increasing tolerance and clarity.
  2. Can it hurt? — If it hides poor affordances.
  3. What to measure? — Both performance and perception.

Further reading

  • Original CHI '95 work; modern UX research