The Role of Personality in User Experience Part II: Designing for Different Personality Types
The Role of Personality in User Experience Part II: Designing for Different Personality Types
Strategies and Best Practices for Personality-Based Design
In the first article of this short series, we explored how personality traits influence user behaviour and preferences in human-computer interaction (HCI). We introduced the Five-Factor Model of personality and discussed how traits like openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism can influence user behaviour and preferences.
This article explores more practical strategies and best practices for designing with personality in mind. We'll cover key approaches to personality-based design, specific practices for each of the Big Five personality traits, case studies of successful implementations, and challenges to consider in this exciting field. We'll also introduce the concept of "personalityzation" — a specific approach to adapting user interfaces based on personality traits.
Key Strategies for Personality-Based Design
Identifying Relevant Personality Traits
The first step in personality-based design is determining which personality traits are most relevant to the specific context of the product. The Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality, encompassing Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism, provides a comprehensive framework for understanding individual differences (McCrae & Costa, 1996). However, not all traits are equally important in every design scenario.
For example, in the context of e-learning platforms, Sarsam and Al-Samarraie (2018) found that Neuroticism and Extraversion had particularly strong effects on user preferences for interface elements. Users high in Neuroticism preferred interfaces with lower information density and more muted colour schemes, along with clear, step-by-step navigation. Conversely, users high in Extraversion had a preference for interfaces with higher information density, vibrant colours, and exploratory navigation styles.
Methods for Assessing User Personality
Once relevant traits are identified, the next challenge is to assess users' personalities efficiently and accurately. Various methods can be used, including:
a) Explicit assessment: The Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) developed by Gosling et al. (2003) is a brief questionnaire that measures the Big Five personality dimensions. Despite its brevity, the TIPI has shown good validity and can be useful for quickly assessing user personality during onboarding or profile setup.
b) Implicit assessment and data mining: Behavioural analysis can infer personality traits from user interactions. Chittaranjan et al. (2013) demonstrated how smartphone usage patterns correlate with personality traits. For instance, extraverts tend to have larger contact lists and use messaging apps more frequently, while introverts are more likely to use office and calendar apps. Personality traits can also be inferred from existing data, such as social media activity. Research has found that Facebook likes could predict personality traits with surprising accuracy (Kosinski et al., 2014). This method requires large datasets to uncover patterns indicative of personality traits, but it raises significant privacy concerns.
Implementing Personality-Based Design
Adaptive vs. Adaptable Systems
One fundamental decision when using personality to inform UX is whether to create adaptive systems that automatically adjust to the user's personality or adaptable systems that allow users to customise their experience. This dichotomy has been a subject of debate in HCI research for decades (Findlater & Gajos, 2009).
Adaptive systems use algorithms to infer user preferences and adjust accordingly. For example, Sarsam and Al-Samarraie (2018) developed an adaptive e-learning interface that automatically adjusted based on users' personality traits. Their results showed improved learning outcomes and user satisfaction compared to a non-adaptive interface.
On the other hand, adaptable systems give users control over their experience. McGrenere et al. (2002) found that users preferred and performed better with adaptable interfaces compared to adaptive ones in a word processing context. They argued that user control led to a greater sense of mastery and satisfaction.
The choice between adaptive and adaptable approaches often depends on the specific context and user needs. Adaptive systems can reduce cognitive load but may also lead to a sense of unpredictability or loss of control. As a result, context should be considered before making a decision to implement personality-based design.
Personalityzation: Adapting UI to Personality Traits
Personalityzation, a term coined by Arazy et al. (2015), refers to the systematic adaptation of user interfaces based on personality traits. This approach goes beyond traditional personalisation by grounding interface adaptations in established psychological theory.
For example, a personalityzation system might adjust the information density and colour scheme of an interface based on a user's level of Neuroticism, or modify the navigation structure based on their Openness to Experience. The goal is to create an interface that aligns with the user's cognitive and emotional tendencies, potentially leading to improved user satisfaction and performance.
Preliminary research suggest that personlityzation can lead to:
Enhanced usability: By tailoring interfaces to individual personality traits, users may find systems easier to navigate and more enjoyable to use.
Improved user satisfaction: When an interface aligns with a user's personality, it can lead to a more positive overall experience.
Increased engagement: Interfaces that resonate with a user's personality may encourage more frequent and prolonged use.
Stability and predictability: Unlike some personalisation methods that constantly change based on user behaviour, personality traits are relatively stable, potentially leading to more consistent experiences.
Best Practices for Different Personality Types
While individual differences exist, research has provided insights into designing for different personality traits. Here, we'll focus on the Big Five traits and discuss some evidence-based strategies for each.
Openness to Experience
Individuals high in openness are characterised by curiosity, creativity, and a preference for novelty (Costa & McCrae, 1992). When designing for these users consider the following:
Offer customisation options: Karsvall (2002) found that users high in openness preferred interfaces with more customisation options.
Introduce novel features regularly: Research has repeatedly showed that users hight in openness seek novelty. For example, Tuten and Bosnjak (2001) observed that openness was positively correlated with exploratory behaviour online.
Provide access to diverse content: Multiple studies have found that openness is associated with a preference for diversity.
For users low in openness:
Maintain consistency: Oreg (2003) found that low openness was associated with resistance to change, suggesting the importance of stable, predictable interfaces.
Provide clear navigation paths: McElroy et al. (2007) observed that low openness was related to more focused, goal-directed web browsing behaviour.
Conscientiousness
Conscientious individuals tend to be organised, responsible, and goal-oriente. Design considerations include:
Provide detailed information and goal-tracking features: Sarsam & Al-Samarraie (2018) found that conscientious users preferred interfaces with more detailed information and progress tracking.
Offer planning and organisation tools: Devaraj et al. (2008) observed that conscientiousness was positively related to perceived usefulness of technology in work contexts. Providing tools that enable optimal planning and organisation will cater to the needs of such users.
For users low in conscientiousness:
Offer reminders and break tasks into smaller steps: Digital planning tools and reminders can be particularly beneficial for individuals who struggle with organisation and time management, traits often associated with lower conscientiousness.
Extraversion
Extraverts are characterised by sociability, assertiveness, and energy. Some suggestions supported by research include:
Incorporate social features: Extraverts thrive in social situations and that is reflected in all aspects of their life. For example, Amichai-Hamburger et al. (2002) found that extraverts preferred websites with more interactive features.
Use vibrant design elements: Karsvall (2002) observed that extraverts responded positively to interfaces with bolder colours and more dynamic layouts.
For introverts:
Provide private modes and individual activities: Introverts often prefer individual activities and spending time alone. For example, Hamburger & Ben-Artzi (2000) noted that introverts tended to use the internet more for solitary activities.
Agreeableness
Agreeable individuals are characterised by cooperation, empathy, and altruism. Design strategies include:
Use friendly language: Research has shown that agreeable individuals tend to prefer cooperative rather than competitive interactions (Jensen-Campbell & Graziano, 2001) . This suggests that interfaces using warm, cooperative language may be more appealing to users high in agreeableness.
Incorporate collaborative features: Graziano et al. (2007) observed that agreeableness predicted cooperative behaviour in group settings.
For users low in agreeableness:
Offer direct communication options: Jensen-Campbell & Graziano (2001) found that less agreeable individuals preferred more direct communication styles.
Neuroticism
Neuroticism is characterised by emotional instability and tendency towards negative emotions. Design considerations include:
Provide reassuring feedback: Sarsam & Al-Samarraie (2018) found that users high in neuroticism responded positively to interfaces with more supportive feedback.
Offer undo options and clear error recovery: Individuals high in neuroticism experience higher stress when errors or something unexpected occurs.
Encourage them to take breaks and disconnect: A meta-analysis by Marciano et al., 2020 found that neuroticism is associated with higher risk of problematic digital behaviours, including online addictions.
For emotionally stable users:
Challenge users with advanced features: Barnett et al. (2015) found that emotional stability was positively related to technology acceptance and use.
Challenges and Considerations
While personality-based design offers many benefits, it also presents significant challenges:
Ethical implications: Privacy concerns in collecting personality data are paramount. Research has demonstrated that detailed personality profiles could be constructed from digital footprints, raising questions about user consent and data protection (Kosinski et al., 2013).
Technical challenges: Accurately assessing personality traits in real-time remains a significant challenge. While questionnaires like the Big Five Inventory are well-validated, they may be impractical for many applications. Recent research has explored using machine learning to infer personality from digital behaviour (Youyou et al., 2015), but these methods are still evolving.
Balancing personalisation with universal usability: While tailoring experiences to different personality types can improve engagement for some users, we must also ensure that the core functionality and usability of the product remains accessible to all users, regardless of their personality.
Avoiding stereotyping and pigeonholing: Personality traits exist on a continuum, and individuals may exhibit different levels of each trait in different contexts. We should avoid oversimplifying or stereotyping users based on their assumed personality type.
Cross-cultural considerations: Most existing research on personality-based design has been conducted in Western, educated, industrialised, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) societies. However, personality expression and its impact on behaviour can vary across cultures (e.g., Schmitt et al., 2007). Consider how personality-based design principles apply in diverse cultural contexts.
Conclusion
Incorporating personality considerations into design can lead to more engaging, effective, and satisfying user experiences. As we've seen in this series, research has provided valuable insights into how different personality traits influence user preferences and behaviours.
However, before applying these principles, it’s important to consider the specific context and goals of each project. As research in this field progresses, we can expect more sophisticated and nuanced approaches to personality-based design, including further developments in personalityzation. Designers and researchers must remain mindful of both the opportunities and responsibilities inherent in this powerful approach to user experience design.
In the next article for this series, we will be looking at the role of personality in user research.