Hicks Law

owl-listener/designer-skills/interaction-design/skills/hicks-law

作者 owl-listener9a6930cf84a8無授權條款2.8K 個星標收錄於 2026年10月8日更新於 2026年10月8日儲存庫4 週前更新

Apply Hick's Law — decision time grows with the number of simultaneous choices. Use when a screen offers too many options at once. For how many items survive in memory afterwards, use `millers-law`.

僅含說明Design & Creative
AI 產生的概覽

套用希克定律,透過限制並分組介面同時呈現的選項來縮短決策時間。

功能
提供套用希克定律的指引,該定律指出決策時間會隨同時可選項數量呈對數成長。內容說明此原理,提供用於參考的反應時間公式,並列出適用場景,包括導覽選單、工具列、引導流程、表單欄位、定價表與搜尋結果。也涵蓋常見錯誤與最佳實務,例如分組、智慧預設值與漸進式揭露。
適用情境
適用於某個畫面、選單或流程同時提供過多選項,需要縮短決策時間或降低認知負擔時。也適用於檢視導覽層級、工具列操作、引導步驟、表單欄位或定價級距。若關注之後能記住多少項目,此技能建議改用 millers-law。
執行需求
無需腳本、工具、套件或憑證;僅為說明性指引。

Hick's Law

You are an expert in cognitive load and decision-making in interface design.

What You Do

You apply Hick's Law to reduce decision time and cognitive burden by controlling the number and complexity of choices presented at any moment.

The Principle

The time it takes to make a decision increases logarithmically with the number of choices. Doubling the number of options does not double decision time — but each added option still costs something. The practical design implication:

  • Presenting fewer options at once speeds up decision-making
  • Grouping and progressive disclosure reduce apparent complexity without hiding functionality
  • The quality and clarity of options matters as much as the count — ambiguous or overlapping options are harder to choose from than a larger set of distinct ones

The Formula (for context)

RT = a + b × log₂(n + 1) — where RT is reaction time, n is the number of choices, and a/b are empirically measured constants. The formula applies best to simple, equal-probability choices (keyboard shortcuts, menu items); it is less predictive for complex real-world decisions.

Where to Apply It

  • Navigation menus: limit top-level items; group secondary items
  • Toolbars and action bars: surface the most common actions; tuck the rest in overflow menus
  • Onboarding flows: present one decision per step rather than multiple questions on a single screen
  • Form fields: reduce optional fields; present required fields first
  • Pricing tables: three tiers is the conventional sweet spot; more creates analysis paralysis
  • Search results and feeds: pagination and progressive loading prevent the full count from overwhelming decision

Common Mistakes

  • Conflating "fewer options" with "less functionality" — the goal is reducing simultaneous choices, not removing features
  • Applying it to justify hiding important options users need frequently
  • Ignoring choice quality: five clear, distinct options can be easier to choose from than three vague ones

Best Practices

  • Group related options before reducing count — categorization reduces apparent complexity more than removal
  • For high-frequency actions, consider defaulting or smart defaults to skip the choice entirely
  • Use progressive disclosure: show defaults, let users reveal advanced options
  • Test decision time directly in usability studies when navigation or menu depth is in question

來源與署名

來源:owl-listener/designer-skills位於interaction-design/skills/hicks-law提交9a6930c

授權條款: 無授權條款

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架