Confirmation bias is the tendency to favor information that confirms what we already believe, while ignoring or discounting evidence that challenges our assumptions. In UX, it shows up when teams interpret user feedback, analytics, or test results through the lens of their preconceived ideas, leading to poor decisions and missed opportunities.
Sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to keep investing time, effort, or money into something, just because you’ve already invested so much, even when it’s clear it’s not working. In UX, this shows up when teams cling to flawed designs, failed features, or outdated systems simply because they don’t want to “waste” what’s already been spent.
Broken Windows UX happens when small, visible flaws in an interface, like typos, misaligned elements, or inconsistent colors, create a perception that the entire product is neglected or unreliable. Even if the core functionality works, those little cracks erode user trust and make the product feel less cared for.
HiPPO stands for Highest Paid Person’s Opinion. It describes the all-too-common situation where decisions about design, product, or strategy are driven not by evidence or user needs, but by the gut feelings of the most senior (and often least informed) person in the room.
A canary release is a deployment strategy where you roll out a new feature or version to a small subset of users first, like sending a canary into a coal mine, before releasing it to everyone. It’s a way to catch problems early and minimize risk while gathering real-world feedback.
UX Theater is when a team goes through the motions of doing user experience work, but without improving the experience. It’s the performance of design thinking: sticky notes, empathy maps, and user personas that look great in a presentation, but have little to no impact on the final product. It’s like hosting a cooking show and never actually serving a meal.
“Design by committee” happens when too many voices get equal weight in the design process, and instead of a clear vision, you end up with a safe, bland compromise that pleases no one. It’s the UX equivalent of a potluck where everyone brings bread, technically edible, but deeply unsatisfying.
The false consensus effect is the tendency to assume that others share your opinions, beliefs, and preferences more than they do. In UX research, it shows up when small groups, whether participants, stakeholders, or even the design team, mistake their limited perspective for “what users want.”
A sad path is the scenario where something goes wrong in a user’s journey, whether it’s an error, invalid input, unexpected behavior, or a dead end. In UX, designing for the sad path means accounting for mistakes, edge cases, and failures gracefully, so users can recover without frustration.
The happy path refers to the ideal, friction-free journey a user takes through your product when everything works perfectly, no errors, no edge cases, no unexpected detours. It’s the “best case scenario” that your design or flow is intended to support.