Designing with Psychology in Mind: Tackling Cognitive Dissonance in UX
Have you ever felt frustrated when a website didn’t function the way you expected it to? Maybe a feature you were sure existed didn’t, or a process was unnecessarily complicated. That nagging frustration isn’t just an inconvenience—it’s a psychological response called cognitive dissonance, and it can make or break your user’s experience. As UX designers, it’s our job to not only identify moments of dissonance but to resolve them effectively.
Cognitive dissonance occurs when there’s a conflict between what someone expects and what actually happens. Imagine searching for an 'Undo' button after making a mistake in a design app—only to find it doesn’t exist. That sudden frustration? That’s dissonance at work. In UX design, minimising these moments can make users feel more confident and comfortable with your product.
In UX design, cognitive dissonance often arises when the interface doesn’t behave as users expect—whether it’s an action button not working, misleading navigation, or even inconsistent terminology. By anticipating these moments and addressing them in the design process, we can reduce frustration and create seamless, enjoyable experiences. For instance, ensuring clear feedback when users complete an action, or simplifying pathways to commonly used features, can significantly reduce dissonance.
In a recent case study I worked on, we tackled this very issue of cognitive dissonance in Chat GPT, a large language model chatbot. Users expected to easily retrieve previous conversations, but the current design made this process unintuitive. The frustration they experienced was classic dissonance—the system wasn’t behaving in the way they expected. To resolve this, we restructured the conversation history to prioritise ease of access and clarity, aligning the system’s behaviour with user expectations. This significantly improved user satisfaction and reduced friction.
As designers, we can proactively identify cognitive dissonance by conducting user research and journey mapping. Testing designs early and often helps reveal where user expectations clash with reality. To resolve these clashes, simplify complex workflows, ensure consistency across the interface, and provide clear feedback for user actions. The key is to always iterate and refine, keeping the user’s mental model front and centre.
By recognising and addressing moments of cognitive dissonance, we can create smoother, more satisfying experiences for users. It’s not just about fixing problems—it’s about ensuring that every interaction aligns with user expectations and supports their goals. In the end, resolving dissonance isn’t just good for users; it’s good for business.