Product UX Expert
Core Principles
- Reduce Cognitive Load — Minimize mental effort required for every interaction
- Accessibility First — WCAG 2.2 AA is the baseline, not an afterthought
- Evidence-Based — Decisions backed by user research, not assumptions
- Anticipatory Design — Predict user needs before they ask
- Ethical Design — No dark patterns, transparent data practices
- Mobile First — Design for smallest screens, enhance for larger
Quick Reference
Nielsen's 10 Heuristics
| # |
Heuristic |
Key Question |
| 1 |
Visibility of System Status |
Does the user always know what's happening? |
| 2 |
Match System & Real World |
Does it use familiar language and concepts? |
| 3 |
User Control & Freedom |
Can users easily undo or exit? |
| 4 |
Consistency & Standards |
Does it follow platform conventions? |
| 5 |
Error Prevention |
Does it prevent errors before they occur? |
| 6 |
Recognition over Recall |
Is information visible, not memorized? |
| 7 |
Flexibility & Efficiency |
Are there shortcuts for experts? |
| 8 |
Aesthetic & Minimalist Design |
Is every element necessary? |
| 9 |
Help Users with Errors |
Are error messages helpful and actionable? |
| 10 |
Help & Documentation |
Is help available when needed? |
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Load Types
Intrinsic Load — Complexity inherent to the task itself
Extraneous Load — Unnecessary complexity from poor design (eliminate this!)
Germane Load — Mental effort for learning/understanding (support this)
Key Laws
Hick's Law — More choices = longer decision time
→ Limit options to 5-7, use progressive disclosure
Miller's Law — Working memory holds 7±2 items
→ Chunk information, use visual grouping
Fitts's Law — Larger, closer targets are easier to click
→ Make primary actions big and accessible
Jakob's Law — Users expect your site to work like others
→ Follow established patterns
Von Restorff — Different items are more memorable
→ Highlight CTAs with contrast
Serial Position — First and last items remembered best
→ Put key info at start/end of lists
Gestalt Principles
Proximity — Close elements are perceived as groups
Similarity — Similar elements are perceived as related
Continuity — Eyes follow smooth lines and curves
Closure — Mind completes incomplete shapes
Figure-Ground — Elements seen as foreground or background
Common Region — Elements in same area are grouped
Heuristic Evaluation
Process
1. Define scope — What screens/flows to evaluate
2. Select evaluators — 3-5 UX experts (80%+ issues found)
3. Independent review — Each expert reviews alone
4. Apply heuristics — Rate severity for each issue
5. Consolidate — Merge findings, remove duplicates
6. Prioritize — Rank by severity × frequency
7. Report — Actionable recommendations
Severity Rating
| Level |
Severity |
Description |
| 0 |
Not a problem |
Evaluator disagrees it's an issue |
| 1 |
Cosmetic |
Fix only if extra time available |
| 2 |
Minor |
Low priority, causes friction |
| 3 |
Major |
High priority, significant impact |
| 4 |
Catastrophic |
Must fix before release |
Issue Template
## Issue: [Brief Description]
**Heuristic:** #N - Name
**Severity:** 0-4
**Location:** Screen / Component / Flow
**Problem:**
What's wrong and why it matters to users.
**Evidence:**
Screenshot or recording link.
**Recommendation:**
Specific fix with before/after comparison.
User Journey Mapping
Journey Map Structure
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PERSONA: [Name, Goals, Context] │
├─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬──────────────┤
│ Stage │ Aware │ Consider│ Purchase│ Use │ Advocate │
├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┤
│ Actions │ Search │ Compare │ Signup │ Onboard │ Share/Review │
├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┤
│ Touch- │ Search │ Website │ Checkout│ App │ Social │
│ points │ Ads │ Reviews │ Email │ Support │ Email │
├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┤
│ Emotions│ 😐 │ 🤔 │ 😟 │ 😊 │ 😍 │
│ │ curious │ hopeful │ anxious │ relieved│ delighted │
├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┤
│ Pain │ Too many│ Info │ Complex │ Unclear │ No referral │
│ Points │ options │ overload│ forms │ next │ program │
├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┤
│ Opportu-│ Clear │ Compare │ 1-click │ Progress│ Share │
│ nities │ tagline │ table │ signup │ tracker │ incentive │
└─────────┴─────────┴─────────┴─────────┴─────────┴──────────────┘
Touchpoint Analysis
For each touchpoint, evaluate:
1. Entry Point — How do users arrive?
2. User Goal — What are they trying to accomplish?
3. Friction — What slows them down?
4. Emotion — How do they feel?
5. Drop-off Risk — Where might they abandon?
6. Opportunity — How can we improve?
Accessibility (WCAG 2.2 AA)
POUR Principles
Perceivable — Can users perceive the content?
✓ Text alternatives for images
✓ Captions for video
✓ 4.5:1 color contrast
✓ Resizable text (up to 200%)
Operable — Can users operate the interface?
✓ Keyboard accessible
✓ No keyboard traps
✓ Skip navigation links
✓ Sufficient time limits
✓ Focus visible (new in 2.2!)
Understandable — Can users understand the content?
✓ Language declared
✓ Consistent navigation
✓ Error identification
✓ Labels and instructions
Robust — Works with assistive technology?
✓ Valid HTML
✓ ARIA landmarks
✓ Status messages announced
New in WCAG 2.2 (2023-2025)
Focus Not Obscured (AA) — Focused element not fully hidden
Focus Appearance (AA) — Visible focus indicator (2px outline)
Dragging Movements (AA) — Alternatives to drag-and-drop
Target Size (AA) — Minimum 24×24 CSS pixels
Consistent Help (A) — Help mechanisms in consistent locations
Redundant Entry (A) — Don't ask for same info twice
Accessible Authentication (A) — No cognitive function tests for login
Quick Checklist
## Accessibility Check
### Perceivable
- [ ] All images have meaningful alt text
- [ ] Videos have captions and transcripts
- [ ] Color contrast ratio ≥ 4.5:1 (text), ≥ 3:1 (large text)
- [ ] Information not conveyed by color alone
- [ ] Text can be resized to 200% without loss
### Operable
- [ ] All functionality available via keyboard
- [ ] Focus order is logical
- [ ] Focus indicator is visible (2px outline minimum)
- [ ] No keyboard traps
- [ ] Skip links provided
- [ ] Touch targets ≥ 24×24px
### Understandable
- [ ] Page language declared
- [ ] Consistent navigation across pages
- [ ] Form errors clearly identified
- [ ] Labels associated with inputs
### Robust
- [ ] Valid HTML (no duplicate IDs)
- [ ] ARIA roles used correctly
- [ ] Works with screen readers (NVDA/VoiceOver)
Interaction Patterns
Micro-interactions
Purpose of micro-interactions:
1. Feedback — Confirm user action (button click, form submit)
2. Status — Show current state (loading, progress)
3. Guidance — Direct attention (onboarding tooltips)
4. Delight — Create emotional connection (subtle animations)
Best Practices:
✓ Keep animations under 300ms
✓ Use easing (ease-out for exits, ease-in for entries)
✓ Respect prefers-reduced-motion
✓ Animate properties that don't trigger layout (transform, opacity)
Motion Design Principles
Duration Scale:
- Micro (fade, state change) → 100-200ms
- Small (dropdown, tooltip) → 200-300ms
- Medium (modal, sidebar) → 300-400ms
- Large (page transition) → 400-500ms
Easing:
- ease-out → Elements entering (decelerate into view)
- ease-in → Elements exiting (accelerate out of view)
- ease-in-out → Elements moving (natural feel)
Form Design
✓ One column layout (no side-by-side inputs)
✓ Labels above inputs (not placeholder-only)
✓ Group related fields visually
✓ Inline validation (after field blur)
✓ Clear error messages with solutions
✓ Show password option
✓ Autofill support (autocomplete attributes)
✓ Smart defaults based on context
Design System Integration
Component States
Every interactive component needs:
Default — Normal resting state
Hover — Mouse over (desktop)
Focus — Keyboard focus (visible ring)
Active — Being pressed/clicked
Disabled — Not currently available
Loading — Processing action
Error — Validation failed
Success — Action completed
Design Tokens
{
"color": {
"text": {
"primary": "#1a1a1a",
"secondary": "#6b6b6b",
"disabled": "#a3a3a3",
"inverse": "#ffffff"
},
"interactive": {
"default": "#0066cc",
"hover": "#0052a3",
"active": "#003d7a",
"focus": "#0066cc"
},
"feedback": {
"error": "#d32f2f",
"warning": "#f57c00",
"success": "#388e3c",
"info": "#1976d2"
}
},
"spacing": {
"xs": "4px",
"sm": "8px",
"md": "16px",
"lg": "24px",
"xl": "32px"
},
"radius": {
"sm": "4px",
"md": "8px",
"lg": "16px",
"full": "9999px"
}
}
2025 UX Trends
AI-Driven Personalization
✓ Adaptive interfaces based on user behavior
✓ Predictive content suggestions
✓ Context-aware personalization
✓ Real-time UI adjustments
⚠️ Always provide transparency and user control
⚠️ Respect privacy, use on-device processing when possible
Anticipatory Design
Design that:
- Predicts user needs before they ask
- Reduces decision fatigue with smart defaults
- Automates repetitive tasks
- Surfaces relevant information proactively
Example: Pre-filling shipping address based on previous orders
Ethical Design Practices
DO:
✓ Clear consent for data collection
✓ Easy-to-find privacy settings
✓ Honest product representations
✓ Sustainable design (reduce digital carbon)
DON'T (Dark Patterns):
✗ Confirmshaming ("No, I don't want to save money")
✗ Hidden costs
✗ Trick questions
✗ Forced continuity (hard-to-cancel subscriptions)
✗ Misdirection
✗ Roach motels (easy in, hard out)
Evaluation Template
# UX Evaluation Report
## Overview
- **Product:** [Name]
- **Scope:** [Screens/Flows evaluated]
- **Date:** [Date]
- **Evaluators:** [Names]
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentences on overall UX health and critical findings]
## Methodology
- Nielsen's 10 Heuristics
- WCAG 2.2 AA Compliance Check
- Cognitive Load Analysis
## Findings by Severity
### Catastrophic (Severity 4)
[Issues that must be fixed immediately]
### Major (Severity 3)
[High priority issues]
### Minor (Severity 2)
[Low priority improvements]
## Accessibility Status
- [ ] WCAG 2.2 A Compliance
- [ ] WCAG 2.2 AA Compliance
- [ ] Screen Reader Compatible
- [ ] Keyboard Navigation Complete
## Recommendations
[Prioritized action items with effort estimates]
## Appendix
- Screenshot evidence
- User testing video clips
- Competitive analysis
See Also