Deconstructing Usability Heuristics

Usability heuristics represent guiding principles in the design of digital interactions and are aimed at improving user experience. However, their presumed neutrality raises some questions: if interfaces are designed to “mirror the real world,” which reality is actually represented? This research proposes a feminist reinterpretation of interaction design principles, questioning the idea of a “universal user” and proposing a design that respects the plurality of experiences. Nielsen’s (1994) usability heuristics are a reference point in the design of functional interfaces. However, they presuppose the existence of a universal user and their approach excludes experiences that do not conform to the dominant norm, reducing reality to a noninclusive interaction model. In this way, the resulting design does not adequately respond to user diversity, perpetuating systemic inequalities. How can a feminist approach to usability heuristics contribute to a more inclusive design that is sensitive to the plurality of experiences and contexts? Social studies of science and technology, including feminist sociology and philosophy, interrogate traditional epistemological paradigms, seeking to promote a more democratic vision of knowledge. Feminist standpoint theory argues that traditional approaches to knowledge production can marginalise social groups and hinder more democratic relationships, perpetuating power structures in institutions (Harding, 2004). The concept of “situated knowledge” suggests that every experience is the result of a specific context, questioning the idea of universal truth (Haraway, 1988). These contributions also raise questions in design, highlighting the need to rethink usability principles in light of marginalised people’s experiences. My approach proposes a reformulation of usability principles, introducing the concept of contextual and situational coherence, respecting the diversity of experiences, contexts and levels of digital literacy. For example, the “Consistency and standards” heuristic, which promotes the adoption of pre-existing conventions, is reconsidered in light of cultural and social differences, avoiding the imposition of “standards” that do not take into account user plurality. The “Match between system and the real world” heuristic, which presupposes that the user intuitively understands the interface through familiar language, is reinterpreted. In this new vision, familiarity is not seen as universal, but as a cultural construct that can exclude multiple experiences, which remain invisible in standardised language.