5

I'm working in some workflows, and we've caught a number of possible exceptions (before actually implementing) that might allow the user to correct their actions.

We're debating between just sending the users back to correct the problem with the use of a traditional Warning Dialog:

mockup showing alert dialog with this text: This happened. If you continue, these are the possible consequences. Click OK to continue or Cancel to abort.

download bmml source – Wireframes created with Balsamiq Mockups

Or allowing them to complete the operation with a forgiving warning dialog:

mockup showing alert dialog with this text: This happened. If you choose to continue, these are the possible consequences. Click OK to Continue or Cancel to abort. However, we identified this exception, so you can successfully complete the action by clicking Fix and Complete.

download bmml source

a) Is there a name for this kind of pattern?

b) Are there any design considerations that should be taken?

c) When would it be appropriate to use this?

d) How many options are too many options?

edgarator
  • 5,968
  • 6
  • 32
  • 57
  • Out of interest, why would a user choose "OK" as opposed to "Fix and Complete" in your second example? What problem does that solve? – Kit Grose May 27 '13 at 23:43
  • It's a way to enable the deferred choice pattern. The user might want to correct a specific issue at a later time. Have a read here, http://www.workflowpatterns.com/patterns/control/state/wcp16.php As I said before. – edgarator May 28 '13 at 00:18

2 Answers2

6

First, the guidelines of Microsoft about messages is really informative and helpful.

One example for a confirmation message, where several options are possible, is the duplicate file copying message (see below). See how each option is associated with its respectable consequences, and it's relatively easy to choose between them.

In general, allowing users to "recover" from the error without going back is good for usability (see also the "Save/Discard/Cancel" messages of closing an unsaved document). Making users go back to do something is very disturbing, as I personally saw in usability tests. I think it's because users need to remember what they need to fix, which loads their working memory. This is in addition to the frown of not being able to proceed. This is why it is encouraged to provide a "recovery option" (you may also adopt this name for the pattern).

An even better solution would be to prevent this kind of error in the first place. This can be achieved by providing the warning message inside the screen or form the produced it, before the "Continue" button was click. Another solution is inline validation.

Regarding the "too many options", I don't like any absolute rules. The only rule that is always true is "It depends". Three options might be OK, if they are not very complicated or overwhelming. Also, it depends how much patience your users have, and how critical is the operation.

duplicate file copying message

On a side note, your unforgiving message is confusing, since it reads "cancel to abort", which might be interpreted as "erase all my previous work, and abandon whatever I was doing", although you just meant "go back to previous screen and fix something".

Dvir Adler
  • 5,008
  • 2
  • 28
  • 44
2

Few thoughts:

  • I would like to use 2 buttons at most.

  • Encourage user to continue on the flow instead of cancelling. Because of that reason I have kept "Continue" more visible than Cancel.

  • Regarding how many are too many.. I would say 2 are too many so try to keep the option down to 1 to the levels possible. Even when you have two, pick one as "Recommended One".

I am suggesting to use two buttons model which is the easiest model for the users to understand and doesn't compromise on usability. The mental model with 3 buttons is complex because you can cancel, but other than cancelling, you still have two ways to choose from and two paths create 1) confusion 2) burden to make a decision 3) fear of being wrong 4) keeps a thought running in your head that alternate also exists even when you are moving along one path. Two buttons give impression that you are only going along one path and reaching closer to your goals

enter image description here

Salman Ehsan
  • 4,951
  • 20
  • 25
  • Why only two buttons? – edgarator May 27 '13 at 05:00
  • 1
    Two buttons is good because you know there is only one way forward which you can choose to continue over and you can continue with or without fixing the error. Simple. The mental model with 3 buttons is complex because you can cancel, but other than cancelling, you still have two ways to choose from and two paths create 1) confusion 2) burden to make a decision 3) fear of being wrong 4) keeps a thought running in your head that alternate also exists even when you are moving along one path. Two buttons give impression that you are only going along one path and reaching closer to your goals. – Salman Ehsan May 28 '13 at 02:08
  • Just the concept of going one way forward worked perfectly for me. You should update your answer with that. – edgarator May 28 '13 at 04:20
  • Hey do you realize that @dvir-alder answer has three options and a cancel button? – edgarator May 30 '13 at 23:54
  • Yes mate I have seen that but it is hard to find a UX designer who is Fan of Microsoft because of its UX. There are few things wrong with this 3+1 dialogue 1)Overloaded with content 2) Difficult to visually scan and always demands attention 3)Dialogue has unreasonable option, like "don't copy" which is the same as "cancel" and you also have yet another [X] cross button on the top 4) "Copy but keep both files" is unasked for and would create data-redundancy and confusion in the long run. – Salman Ehsan May 31 '13 at 05:22