Online donation slips have perforation strips?!

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/f ... -donations

Can anyone explain to me the purpose of the perforation strip in the screen shot? Does the UX team think that, without that perforation strip, users won't figure out that the form is like a donation slip in the physical world? (I beg to differ.)

Form follows function. If the perforations are merely ornamental, I suggest the screen real estate be reclaimed.

TuckerHST wrote:Can anyone explain to me the purpose of the perforation strip in the screen shot?

I hear you, and would expect the same comment from most anyone who has been waiting anxiously for this capability that has a modicum of web browsing sensibility.

However, never unwilling to hazard a guess, I think the reason is that there are quite a number of members who still are not comfortable with payments and things electronic. This may simply be a nod to them to provide a little comfort visual that might even help them get over their fear and try out the new online system.

I could be totally off base, of course, but this is as comfortable a reason as I am able to conjure up on a moment's notice under the circumstances. [grin]

lajackson wrote:I think the reason is that there are quite a number of members who still are not comfortable with payments and things electronic. This may simply be a nod to them to provide a little comfort visual that might even help them get over their fear and try out the new online system.

I think it's to prevent questions like "how do I fill this out?" From the visual, the anwer is clearly "just like the paper form".

Well, I wouldn't have brought it up if I didn't suspect that you're right -- that the UX designers really do believe that users are so clueless that, without that perforation strip, they won't figure out that it's the same form. For consistency, that argues in favor of including 3 punched holes in Handbook 2, and virtually every PDF form.

Perforations add nothing to the UX and consume constrained screen real estate. If they are merely decoration, they must go. If they are functional, then I'm curious about what they do.

TuckerHST wrote:If they are functional, then I'm curious about what they do.

Well, if you printed the page, it would tell you where to crease and / or cut...

Liz

lmcguire wrote:

TuckerHST wrote:If they are functional, then I'm curious about what they do.

Well, if you printed the page, it would tell you where to crease and / or cut...

Since perforations on the paper form mean there's a carbon copy, perhaps the meaning is: "Press each key hard, you're making multiple copies."

I like how it looks, personally.

Maybe it's one of those Captcha things. You have to count the number of holes to prove you are human. [grin]

sbradshaw wrote:I like how it looks, personally.

Yes, it's pretty, but that doesn't change the fact that functionless decoration in a constrained dimension diminishes usability.

Most screens are landscape; the form is portrait. That means every vertical pixel has to count. Now if those perforations DO something, that's a horse of a different color.

If I were one of the programmers, and I had seen this thread, I would be *seriously* pondering Easter eggs by now.

lmcguire wrote:If I were one of the programmers, and I had seen this thread, I would be *seriously* pondering Easter eggs by now.

Yess! If the perforation strip didn't do anything before, maybe it will now.

I think there's something to be said for a design that prevents questions. Even intelligent people might wonder if the categories are the same or if there might be some other difference. After all, when you're dealing with money, you want to be sure.

The church has a very limited help desk staff. Normally they help leaders, but this is something rolling out to the entire church. Help desk would be completely overwhelmed if even a very small percentage of people called to ask that question.

So while this might seem to be a violation of sound web page design, I think it's fulfilling a higher design function of being easily understandable by the masses. I think it will go away at a future date, once everyone has settled in.

russellhltn wrote:I think there's something to be said for a design that prevents questions. Even intelligent people might wonder if the categories are the same or if there might be some other difference. After all, when you're dealing with money, you want to be sure.

The church has a very limited help desk staff. Normally they help leaders, but this is something rolling out to the entire church. Help desk would be completely overwhelmed if even a very small percentage of people called to ask that question.

So while this might seem to be a violation of sound web page design, I think it's fulfilling a higher design function of being easily understandable by the masses. I think it will go away at a future date, once everyone has settled in.

Hmm, interesting take. A couple of thoughts. First, this system isn't replacing traditional donations, right? So the target audience is early adopters, not the anxious "masses." Second, intelligent people are the least likely to interpret a superfluous decoration as substantive (i.e., a legitimate indication that the important stuff hasn't changed). In fact, my experience with the Gospel is that's what we're taught NOT to do, i.e., not to make decisions based on superficial indicators or outward appearance. To me, it seems contradictory to follow the opposite philosophy in UX.

All that said, I'm still open to the results of usability testing. Sometimes counter-intuitive conclusions are arrived at by testing; that's why it's done. But to be clear, it would be a surprise result.

TuckerHST wrote:First, this system isn't replacing traditional donations, right? So the target audience is early adopters, not the anxious "masses."

It sure seems to me that it is indeed replacing traditional donations for many of its users. If the target audience were only early adopters, then it wouldn't be worth the effort. It makes much more sense that the target audience is quite broad. Of course, by definition the early adopters will be first, but I can't imagine that all this effort would be put into a system that is only or even primarily for the early adopters.

In any case, I think there's a good argument to be made that the image subtly reinforces the message that this online system replaces the paper system people are familiar with. Most people won't give it a conscious thought. I think it's a reasonable design, but even though some may think otherwise, this is certainly a very minor issue.

The target audience is not early adopters. Those who are typically early adopters may help get the word out, but the goal is to get this into the hands of the masses.

My stake has been using this application for about a month. When people look at it for the first time, I frequently hear "it even has the perforations at the top of the slip." When I was looking at the system with my daughter while she was home from college a couple of weeks ago, we looked at how you can see the receipt for a past donation. (Yes, you see a yellow slip.) Her excited comment when she looked at it was "See! I told people you don't tear the white part off the top of the yellow slip."

Some people will see that as wasted space. Others see that detail and the familiarity makes them more comfortable with the application. In my experience with members of my ward, the little "strip" of real estate has been valuable in increasing their comfort with the application.

As for uptake, 30% of our donations are coming in electronically and about 25% of the members using electronic donations are retired.

scgallafent wrote: When I was looking at the system with my daughter while she was home from college a couple of weeks ago, we looked at how you can see the receipt for a past donation. (Yes, you see a yellow slip.) Her excited comment when she looked at it was "See! I told people you don't tear the white part off the top of the yellow slip."

The fact that past donations turn yellow just made my day. If nothing else, the decision to keep the online version looking like the hard copy will bring many a smile to people.

It's a matter of familiarity. The online slip looks exactly like the paper slips available in the ward buildings. With no perforations at the top of the online slip, you can bet that some members (especially new converts), would be thinking "Wait a minute. This doesn't look the same."

It's skeuomorphism. A lot of Apple apps used to have that, but it's pretty much been killed by material/flat design.

t0008sa wrote:It's skeuomorphism.

I particularly smile at the end when the picture of the handshake with the bishopric shows up. But I believe those were the instructions to the developers. Make it as much like the real live experience as possible.