I was reading an article about how social media is addictive (https://craigwritescode.medium.com/user-engagement-is-code-for-addiction-a2f50d36d7ac) and it reminded me of a twitter thread from a few weeks ago written by a game designer (https://twitter.com/kchironis/status/1355585411943260162).

The thread is about the idea of "celebration" in game design, and the visual cues games use to reward you for doing the right thing.

The thought occurred then, that social media does the exact same thing. The most prominent example in my mind is Twitter. When you click the like button, what happens? It plays a splashy, eye-catching animation, the like button turns solid red, and then you see the number of likes roll up.

Twitter's goal is to keep you using the platform and to keep you engaged, because that's how they have eyeballs to put ads in front of and how they guess which ads you'll respond to. And to keep users engaged, they use the exact same tactics as video games to make you _want_ to click Like.

Would liking be anywhere near as satisfying if, instead of having a pretty animation, there was a button with the text "Like" that simply changed to "Liked" when you clicked it? I don't think so
Mastodon is guilty of this too, though to a lesser extent (the web interface, at least). You click the favorite or boost buttons and it spins and changes color. It's a less fancy animation, sure, but it's the same principle.

In Mastodon's case, I can at least be reasonably confident that getting people into an addictive loop isn't the deliberate goal, and it's done out of the desire for a nice design. The same certainly can't be said for Twitter.
Follow

@shadowfacts I think users at least need some visual feedback so they know something has happened.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.