[Shenglong]

This is a pretty crass statement to make. If the focus is full-on navigability, I agree that contrast in the navigation bar is paramount. Yet, for many sites with simplified features, the emotional experience trumps the direct navigability of the site itself.

This is especially true for sites like Airbnb (as in the example) where in addition to emotional response, there is an immediate focus on activating users. The focus shifts from full navigability (logging in, become a host, etc) to searching for a listing.

[jalfresi]

"...the emotional experience trumps the direct navigability of the site itself"

The above statement is everything that is wrong with modern visual styling of software. After everything is said and done, software is a tool which people use to accomplish a goal. I would argue that anything that causes friction with that is Bad Design.

As much as some visual/interaction designers may think that "experience is everything", they ignore that they are insisting on manufacturing and enforcing their opinion of what the users experience should be and forget that the user accomplishing their goal is the only experience that matters.

[roldie]

There was a great talk at SXSW last year entitled "The Myth of Reducing Friction in your Product."

Basically, within a given flow (say onboarding or signup), you want to consider having some points of friction interspersed with low friction points. Adding friction in the right places helps to create users who will a)come back and b)will be more active users. The speaker presented some data to back up her assertions.

Getting back to OP's point, the emotional experience is a point of friction that may be worthwhile. Though it may slow down the conversion process or whatever flow the user is supposed to go through, it may result in users who become more attached to the product and ultimately spend more.

http://schedule.sxsw.com/2015/2015/events/event_IAP35677

[wtetzner]

The thing is, if the site doesn't make it easy for me to accomplish what I want, then my emotional response is frustration. It doesn't matter how nice or pretty your site is if I get frustrated before I have the chance to appreciate the design.

I think trying to evoke a certain emotional response can really only be effective if it's not getting in the way.

[TeMPOraL]

You're right, but there is one key insight you need for your view to be complete: most websites are created to sell you shit - often services, which exist only to be bought. Their actual usefulness is pretty much irrelevant beyond the point people start paying for them. Your ability to use a website / webapp to create value is not something they care about.

As an industry we're hurting ourselves by being in this state of cognitive dissonance. The result is that designers try to apply patterns for selling people shit when they're working on tools, even if given tool is the "real deal" and not meant to drive sales by appearance.

[tedajax]

When did sites become "emotional experiences"? I'm sorry I want to say something more constructive but I'm giggling too much at the absurdity of this statement.

[sholanozie]

Websites are art, the same way that any other creations are. You wouldn't giggle at the idea of a song, a magazine, or a photograph being "emotional experiences", so what makes websites any different?

[TheOtherHobbes]

Probably as soon as they started trying to sell you shit.

I's not absurd at all - it's only absurd if you're in the demo that finds it absurd. And that's quite a small demo compared to most of the population.

You can't sell most people shit unless you create an emotional response.

Hacking psychology - for good or ill - is the basis of all UI and UX. It's a completely different problem to hacking code.

[astazangasta]

The emotional experience I have when I go to a site and see a huge image of some stock photo is anger: "Jesus, what fucking moron put this totally useless picture here, and how do I get to the useful portion of this site and do what I need to do?"

[jwmerrill]

I'd like to call out the google analytics splash page as an example that makes me feel this way. Why is it there at all? Why is there a giant image of some irrelevant face on it?

[gnaritas]

> the emotional experience trumps the direct navigability of the site itself

Users don't come to a website for an emotional experience, they come to use the tool to do something. Emotional experience never trumps usability, ever. The only emotional experience sites with bad usability have is user anger at not being able to figure out how the damn thing works.

[Domenic_S]

The usability of what? Not a glib question -- if your goal is to give the user a feeling which results in them clicking a signup button or going through another flow you've got laid out, why would you want to muddy that up with a nav bar?

For a lot of sites, "Get started" is the #1 thing you want people to do from the homepage. We've known forever that removing distractions from register/checkout/PPC pages increases completion rates -- if you look at your homepage as another page that needs completions then this makes perfect sense.

[gnaritas]

> if your goal is to give the user a feeling which results in them clicking a signup button or going through another flow you've got laid out

And if your usability is so bad they can't find that button, the site sucks. Emotional feelings always come second to usability. Landing page usability is all about selling the user on a call to action, but they have to be able to find that call to action, that's the usability part. I didn't say anything about nav bars, I said usability. Beyond that, your users don't care to or want to be emotionally manipulated; you might want it, your business might want it, but the user don't care about that, they care that they can find the information they're looking and/or accomplish the task they came there for.

[marcosdumay]

Well, if the entire point of your site is to let people get started, ok, remove all navigation.

But if it's useful for something else, like if there's an actual product in it somewhere, with actual features, or if there's actual content somewhere you'd want your visitors to read, it's good to give them the option of doing anything besides "getting started".

[wtetzner]

> The usability of what? > why would you want to muddy that up with a nav bar?

Typically people are looking for information when the visit a brand new site. If the user can't figure out how to get that information, chances are they're going to be frustrated, and have no interest in clicking the button.

[s73v3r]

Emotional experience does NOT trump usability. Period.