If you’ve been in the UX world for five minutes, you’ve probably used “simpler is better” to justify one decision or another.
You’ve also probably learned that features need to be as clear as possible, especially when working with financial products.
So why is it that certain money transfer apps don’t seem to get it, after over a decade of widespread use?
Both examples below are simple, have minimal options to distract the user, and are easy enough to use (at least, that’s what their ubiquity implies). But one has a critical design flaw that reveals a common oversight in UX design.
The differentiating factor is that Option 1 requires a higher cognitive load than Option 2.
Option 2 includes some safeguards:
To be fair to Option 1, request is more easily recognizable in the context of a payment app than receive. In the real world, one wouldn’t say “I’m going to receive money from you for last night’s dinner.” Instead, it would sound more like, “I’m going to request money from you for last night’s dinner.” Again, this simple change adds a moment of hesitation. But both words look very similar to each other by starting with “re-,” allowing the user to associate them quickly, reducing friction.
Overall, Option 2 is the stronger design based on the significant reduction of cognitive load through clearer visuals and more intuitive language.
My goal in outlining these comparable features isn’t to pick on these two apps alone. It’s to highlight a pattern I often see in larger teams: as designers, when designing and testing new features, it’s easy to miss the forest for the trees. Design teams pick apart each feature, line by line, within the context of their product. Users don’t always work this way. They’re using our products in different contexts, often with many other distractions, highlighting the importance of clarity and efficiency.
It’s our responsibility to take this into account when designing from a user-centered perspective, and keep in mind that reduction of cognitive load and language inclusivity can be significant predictors of a product’s success.
Please note: Wise Mind’s UX Review series focuses exclusively on the end-user experience and does not account for real-world constraints like manufacturing costs, engineering limitations, regulatory requirements, or business priorities that teams navigate daily. Effective UX requires collaboration with stakeholders who provide crucial context about feasibility. Take these observations as one perspective on design, not the complete picture.
