Designing for the Brain: How Executive Functions Shape Technology Adaptation
What UX Designers Need to Know
Executive functions refer to our brain's control system — think of them as the conductor of an orchestra, coordinating various cognitive processes to help us achieve our goals. Following Diamond's (2013) framework, we can identify three core executive functions that play key roles in how users interact with technology:
Working memory: Our brain's temporary workspace for holding and manipulating information
Inhibition and and interference control: Our attention and behaviour controller
Cognitive flexibility: Our ability to switch between tasks and adapt to new situations
These core functions support higher-order executive functions like reasoning, problem-solving, and planning. In this analysis, we focus primarily on the three core functions, as these represent the foundational cognitive processes underlying how people interact with technology.
Working Memory: Our Mental Workspace
Working memory serves as our brain's temporary workspace, allowing us to hold and manipulate information actively in mind — think of it as the brain’s notepad. When users interact with technology, working memory becomes essential for maintaining awareness of their goals while processing new information. For instance, when completing an online purchase, users must remember their intended items while navigating through multiple screens and comparing options.
A study on e-health website usage among older adults by Czaja et al. (2013) demonstrated the important role working memory plays. In particular, they found significant correlations between working memory capacity and three key performance measures: accuracy, efficiency, and navigation ability. Users with stronger working memory showed better performance across all metrics, suggesting that this cognitive function plays a fundamental role in successful technology interaction.
Ali et al. (2019) found that even small differences in working memory capacity distinguished between technology adopters and non-adopters in their study of 1,194 participants. Their research showed that users with slightly higher working memory scores were more likely to successfully adopt new farming technologies, suggesting that working memory plays a crucial role even in practical, real-world applications.
However, the relationship between working memory and technology adaptation isn't uniform across all contexts. Berkowsky et al. (2018) discovered that working memory specifically correlated with the willingness to adopt social networking applications, but not with other types of technology. This finding suggests that different technological contexts may place varying demands on working memory resources.
Inhibition: Our Attention Controller
Inhibition enables control of attention and responses in distraction-rich digital environments. Bukchin and Kerret (2020) found that self-control significantly influenced technology adoption in their study of 268 participants using farming technology. Users with stronger inhibitory control were more likely to successfully adopt new technological solutions, even when tempted to revert to familiar methods.
However, the relationship between inhibition and technology adoption isn't straightforward. Chopik et al. (2017) studied how older adults use Information and Communication Technologies —things like smartphones, computers, and digital services. While they initially found positive relationships between self-control and technology use, deeper analysis revealed that inhibition alone didn't predict technology adoption when accounting for other factors.
Duxbury et al. (2014) helped explain this through their qualitative research, showing that successful technology integration depends more broadly on how well users maintain appropriate boundaries and manage their attention across different contexts. This research demonstrated that the relationship between inhibitory control and technology adaptation isn't uniform across contexts, suggesting the need for nuanced design approaches.
Cognitive Flexibility: Our Mental Agility
Cognitive flexibility represents our ability to switch between different tasks or perspectives and adapt to new situations. Interestingly, research shows complex relationships between this function and technology adaptation. Mitzner et al. (2019), for instance, found that cognitive flexibility had varying effects across different timeframes of technology adoption. Their study of older adults using reminder and social management technology revealed that while cognitive flexibility didn't significantly impact initial adoption, it showed negative correlations with mid-term and long-term use.
This surprising finding suggests that the relationship between cognitive flexibility and technology adaptation might be more nuanced than previously thought. It's possible that users with higher cognitive flexibility might be more likely to explore alternative solutions or become distracted by new features, potentially disrupting the establishment of stable usage patterns. This suggests that UX professionals might need to balance supporting exploration with encouraging consistent engagement patterns.
Context Matters
The relationship between executive functions and technology use isn't one-size-fits-all—it varies significantly depending on both the user and the technology. A recent review by Gößwein and Liebherr (2024) emphasises that technological context significantly influences how executive functions affect adaptation. For instance, everyday technologies like social media apps showed different patterns of executive function involvement compared to specialised technologies like automated vehicles or farming equipment.
Additionally, user characteristics play a crucial role. Wulff et al. (2023) found that executive functions had significantly different effects on technology adaptation between neurotypical users and those with autism. Their study revealed that executive functions more strongly predicted successful technology use in autistic users, suggesting that UX designers need to consider how different user populations might rely on executive functions in distinct ways.
Practical Implications for UX
The research findings on executive functions suggest several key approaches for creating more effective and inclusive interfaces:
Supporting working memory
Given the strong evidence for working memory's role in technology adoption, interfaces should actively support users' memory constraints. This means maintaining visible indicators of user location and task progress (context persistence), rather than assuming users will remember their path.
In addition to this, consider information architecture so that it supports natural chunking, as research shows users typically manage 4-5 chunks of information effectively. Design your navigation and content hierarchy accordingly, grouping related items and providing clear organisational structures.
Instead of overwhelming users with all options simultaneously, use progressive disclosure — reveal information progressively as needed.
Managing attention
The research on inhibition highlights the importance of supporting users' attention control. This becomes particularly crucial given the increasing complexity of digital environments.
A way to do this is by using focus states. Design clear visual states that help users maintain focus on current tasks. This might include:
Implementing distinct modal states for focused work (e.g. focus mode)
Using visual hierarchy to subordinate less relevant information
Providing clear feedback for user actions to reinforce attention
Another area that should be considered here is notification design. Given Duxbury et al.'s (2014) findings about the importance of boundary management, develop thoughtful notification systems that respect users' attention such as allowing users to have control over notification timing and frequency of notifications, grouping them logically, and providing users with clear mechanisms for managing interruptions.
Balancing consistency and flexibility
The unexpected findings regarding cognitive flexibility suggest we need to carefully balance interface flexibility with predictability. While it's important to support different user approaches, too much flexibility might negative affect the development of stable usage patterns.
Some ways to do this include offering guided flexibility. For example, allow users to take multiple paths to complete tasks, but maintain consistent underlying patterns. This supports different user approaches while reinforcing core interaction models.
Supporting user learning can also help with this. Design progressive learning experiences that help users build stable mental models while still allowing for exploration. This might include clear, consistent patterns for core interactions, optional advanced features for more experienced users, and contextual help that reinforces standard patterns while explaining alternatives.
Supporting diverse users
Wulff et al.'s (2023) findings about different patterns of executive function utilisation between neurotypical and autistic users highlight the importance of inclusive design approaches.
Designing adaptable interfaces is an approach we can take. Design interfaces that can accommodate different cognitive styles and executive function profiles. For example, provide users with multiple ways to access key features, and allow customisation of information density and presentation.
Having a clear and predictable structure is also important. To support diverse user needs consider using consistent layouts and interaction patterns, provide explicit navigation cues, and maintain predictable response patterns.
Mobile apps like WhatsApp demonstrate inclusive design:
Voice messages offer an alternative to text input
Visual cues complement sound notifications
Message status is communicated through both colour and symbols
Navigation patterns remain consistent across different input methods
Putting It Into Practice
The research findings we've discussed provide a framework for integrating executive function considerations into the UX design process. Here's how UX teams can practically implement these insights throughout the design lifecycle.
Audit existing interfaces: Begin by evaluating current interfaces through an executive function lens (e.g., working memory demands, attention demands, consistency). User journeys can help you identify areas that could be taxing to working memory or include potential sources of distraction.
Testing: Traditional usability testing methods should be augmented to consider executive function impacts. In addition to this, consider adding advanced data analysis to track initial learning curves and patterns of usage and the strategies used over time. Don’t forget to include diverse users in your studies!
Integrate it into your process: Make executive function considerations part of your standard design process. For example, consider executive function demands when mapping user journeys and include cognitive load assessments to wireframes and prototypes. Design reviews can also be helpful as they can help the whole team review how the design supports functions like working memory and attention. Educate your team on executive functions and their importance.
Conclusion
Understanding how executive functions influence technology adaptation provides useful insights for creating more effective and inclusive interfaces. By considering working memory constraints, supporting attention management, balancing flexibility with consistency, and accounting for diverse user needs, we can create interfaces that better support all users in their technology adaptation journey.