I’ve just been reading an interesting article regarding “The Goldilocks Effect” over at UX Booth. In essence, it refers to how Goldilocks tried three bowls of porridge; the first and second being off the mark, the third “just right”. 

Goldilocks’ scenario has become a metaphor regarding how we all generally choose a middle option when confronted with three choices (or a seemingly middle option when confronted with more). I’ve witnessed this during usability tests first hand and, on the face of it, the logic makes complete sense. Most of us will, without always realising, look for the middle ground. Cheap is too risky, whereas expensive, well, it’s expensive. 

Some firms offering 3-4 options have made the decision-making even simpler by highlighting a “most popular”, which is usually the one they want to sell most of. 

However, I don’t agree that this compulsion to find the middle ground is always the case and I personally often sway towards less popular options. 

Two things to consider here, firstly, surely whether we choose a cheaper or more expensive option in contrast to the majority depends on a number of factors including where we fit on Maslows? And also how important/relevant the product or service is. 

Secondly, there exists in most of us an ever-growing level of scepticism. We may automatically think, well they clearly want me to take the middle option because they generate more revenue from it, thus I’ll take one of the others! 

I wonder if a better way of compelling a customer to select an option that you want them to take is to accompany that option with genuine customer feedback/ratings instead?