Too much information.

UX designers know the discussion. Maybe another selection option here? Another additional feature there? How about another added value that makes this product stand out! Companies have an incredible amount to offer and want to provide their discerning customers with all the information they need and utilise every opportunity for flexibility. In doing so, they disregard a decision-making factor that is gaining fundamental importance in our digital age: our attention span is finite - in order to make an impression on customers, we have to meet their needs. This has been scientifically proven.

When creating a presentation, designing websites or creating functional interfaces, our gut feeling often tells us: ‘We need to slim down here.’ But in the process of product or web development, the rational doubters creep in. Have we really mentioned everything? Shouldn't the user still have a choice here? Before we oppose this rationale with scientific arguments, let me tell you something: Your gut feeling is also your friend when it comes to UX decisions. Because many of our intuitive decisions are based on behavioural patterns that have actually been empirically proven and internalised through evolution. Our capacity to absorb information can also be measured by psychological studies, which we kindly did not have to personally compile over years of research. A recognised psychologist did this for us back in 1956.

George A. Miller's publication ‘The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information’ is still a much-cited source for psychologists and information designers today. Among other things, Miller summarised findings from experiments conducted by his colleagues, all of which dealt with the human attention span. His conclusion was that humans can optimally process information units of 7 plus minus 2 in their short-term memory. Miller initially followed a rumbling gut feeling, which he saw confirmed by the scientific studies of his colleagues.

In his publication, Miller draws on the work of many colleagues, such as a memory and perception experiment by Irwin Pollack. Among other things, participants in studies were presented with sounds at different pitches, which they had to name by number. If there were only four or five sound frequencies to be identified, the hit rate was particularly high. From seven different sound frequencies, however, the recognition rate of the test subjects dropped drastically. Similar findings were found in experiments with letters or monosyllabic words, which were best remembered at a number of around seven.

The conclusion sounds simple, but even the most advanced brands in UX design tend to stumble over it. This is because in the web development process, people want everything at once, yesterday instead of today.

However, in order for people to process information optimally, we should make the effort to divide large quantities into smaller chunks. This applies to many areas: Teams without hierarchies work more efficiently with a maximum size of 7, structure levels in documents should not have more than 7 sub-subheadings, and even a navigation should not exceed the number of 7 elements. It simply overtaxes our short-term memory.

Information can be summarised into a group that makes sense to the user, for example because there is a logical pattern behind it.

It is particularly difficult for first-time users of a product, software or website to grasp information quickly and sustainably. Put yourself in the shoes of someone who has to learn to read. At first, they only recognise 6 different units of information in the word m-e-r-k-e-n. Once they have learnt the pattern, they will be able to combine them into a single unit in future and remember whole groups of words better. Most of your users will get to know your digital product in a first visit to the website, a download of the app or a free trial. They don't know your information structure - which makes it all the more important to fall back on what they have learnt, simplification and meaningful grouping.

Most users don't know your information structure - so it's all the more important to use what you've learnt, simplify it and group it sensibly.

Miller also pointed out another finding. The so-called ‘serial position effect’ describes the phenomenon that people remember the first positions in a list best and also remember the last position well. The information in the middle position is lost most quickly.

What does this mean for the information design of a website, for example? We recommend placing important arguments at the beginning and, reinforcingly, at the end, while the middle section of the website tends to contain supplementary arguments, easily digestible or visual information. This ‘memory’ trick is also suitable for presentations and speeches.

The number seven (plus minus 2) is a good number to remember when it comes to modern information design. In the light of digitalisation, there are already newer theories that take a more differentiated view of Miller's memorable insight and question the magic number 7. Current research findings from brain research also play a decisive role when it comes to the information design of digital interfaces: our attention span is decreasing noticeably and our ability to absorb information is dwindling. No joke - it's science! This only emphasises our UX recommendation even more emphatically: less is more. Your customers will reward you with attention.