BIRD UX - Beyond Interfaces, Real delight

Get in touch

hello@birdux.studio

Phone Berlin 0171.12 45 07 3
Phone Mannheim 0177.71 38 208

UX psychology: How the halo effect can influence the trustworthiness of products and services.

28 October 2022 | Experience Design

Reading time: 4 minutes
UX Halo Effect

The halo effect is a well-documented cognitive bias. It describes the socio-psychological phenomenon whereby a first impression or knowledge of a certain characteristic of a person dominates the overall impression. Other characteristics are thus neglected or simply ignored. At the same time, knowledge of this particular attribute leads to conclusions about other attributes or characteristics. A certain characteristic practically "outshines" the other characteristics - hence the name "halo".

For example, an attractive person may automatically be perceived as intelligent and trustworthy, even though there is no logical reason for this assumption. The "halo" effect of attractiveness outshines The person's other characteristics and causes us to draw conclusions and automatically attribute other characteristics to the person that we do not know to be true. It therefore encourages quick and often biased conclusions and decisions. For example, if we like something about a certain thing or person, we tend to develop a more positive attitude towards everything connected with it.

The halo effect is also important for digital products: just think of digital assistants, bots or intelligent toys.

Do you think this toy robot could be up to no good?

But the effect is also relevant for the good old website or apps.

Furthermore, the halo effect is by no means only linked to positive traits, but can also occur in connection with negative traits. For example, if we dislike an aspect of something, we have a tendency to develop a rather negative attitude towards everything to do with it.

A simple example that can often be observed in the digital world is poor automatic translations in product descriptions or product reviews.

Some examples of automated translations

Automatic translations often seem very distant and grammatically a little "off" and yes - readers notice this. As a result, we unconsciously attribute a certain lack of interest in the customers on the company side, which gives minus points in the credibility. We then make these automatic leaps of logic and draw conclusions about the quality of the brand behind this website or service. For example, an obviously automated translation can be associated with "unkindness" or similar. Conclusions are then drawn such as: "This company does not care about its texts“ und „maybe they don't care about their users either“ und damit: „They don't care about me„.
All these automatic attributions can even lead to doubts as to whether you can trust this company, you might ask yourself: If they are not able to translate your product websites properly, what else is lacking or what are they not taking care of properly? Can I trust them with my credit card details or is this also handled as carelessly or "shoddily" as the texts?

This means that a user or customer experience can influence their subjective interpretation of other elements and also their attitudes towards the company as a whole.

This can be particularly critical when trustworthiness is very important. If, for example, banks, airlines or medical products make such "mistakes" - all services to which we entrust our most sensitive data or even our lives - this can severely and permanently damage the credibility of and trust in such a brand. But even in e-commerce, trust and therefore customers can be lost as a result of such things. Accuracy and attention to detail are therefore required here, as this plays into trustworthiness.

In conclusion, it is very important to take the halo effect into account during product development in order to avoid creating a bad impression and thus reduce the risk of losing the trust of users.inside or customersinside.

*This is a Keepon /BeatBot - a toy for autistic children - and it's definitely up to no good 🙂

Sources

Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25-29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071663

The Web Credibility Project: Guidelines - Stanford University. (n.d.). Retrieved October 15, 2022, from https://credibility.stanford.edu/guidelines/index.html

Photo : Torsten Dederichs on Unsplash

UX - but sustainable!

UX - but sustainable!

UX ðŸ'š Earth Day: How can we motivate people to adopt sustainable behaviour? Today is Earth Day! A good occasion for us to actively ask ourselves how we can design technologies in such a way that they have a positive impact on our environment.

Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner