Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Forms are a Conversation

by Nathan Barry
4 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

When designing forms, think about your queries in the form of a conversation.

The users of your software always visit with a goal in mind. Often in web applications, a form stands between them and that goal. Whether the user wants to join a community like Facebook to connect with their friends or use a project management tool to organize their business, forms are there to hurdle.

These forms aren’t necessarily bad, we just need to remember that they are a step in the process—a step that must be completed before the user can reach their goal. So we want to make that step as painless as possible.

A Conversation

Try thinking about the form as a conversation: “I’m going to ask you a few questions so that you can complete your task.” But like any conversation, context and order are really important. Let’s say you and I have just met and after a quick introduction I ask, “What’s your address?” Your likely response would be shock: “Why should I tell you?” After all, we’ve only just met, you don’t know anything about me, and I am asking for personal information. I haven’t given you any reason why I need it.

Online forms are the same. If you ask for too much information too early, your users will pull out. “Why does this shopping website need my address? I haven’t even decided if I am going to purchase from them yet?”

Let’s try another example. You and I meet, but this time we talk for a while, find a mutual interest, and I offer to give you a copy of my favorite book on the subject. Now if I ask for your address to send you the book, your reaction will probably be completely different.

So before asking for personal information in a web application you need two things: trust and a reason.

Building Trust

The best way to build trust is to share information about your software: what it does, who created it, and especially how it will help the potential user. After all, at this point they are just reading about it, and not yet using it. The more you share about how it will help them, the more they will want to trust your software. Then when it comes time to ask for information about them, such as their name and email address to create an account, there will already be some trust built up.

Having a Reason

Let’s say that to browse an exclusive e-commerce website you need to create an account (a silly requirement, but this is just an example). If the create-account form asked for your physical address you may feel your privacy violated, because they haven’t given you a reason yet. Sure, if you buy something your address is needed to ship it to you, but you haven’t made that purchase yet. If the website instead waits to ask for your address until you’ve decided to make a purchase, then there is a reason for asking. You will be much more likely to give it to them.

So, just like in a conversation, when and how a question is asked has a huge impact on whether or not it will be answered.

A Conversation not an Interrogation

If I ask you a few sensible questions, then we are having a conversation. If instead I bombard you with questions, our friendly conversation starts to feel more like an interrogation. So limiting the number of questions asked will go a long way toward maintaining a friendly relationship with your user.

In real life you may feel like you have a social obligation to stay active in the conversation, rather than flipping me off and walking away. But that social obligation is not there at all on the web. With a single click of the back button users can exit a conversation they don’t like and never come back.

Look carefully at every question you are asking. It’s likely that about half of them can be removed. If later on you need more information, you can always ask the question when you have a reason for asking.

If you approach the questions in your form like you would a conversation with a stranger, then your users will be more likely to answer them.

 

 

Portions of this article are excerpts from Nathan Barrys’s book, Designing Web Applications, an everyman’s guide to building apps with solid usability that launches today.

 

 

Image of chatty tea party courtesy Shutterstock.

post authorNathan Barry

Nathan Barry
Nathan Barry is an interface designer and app developer who is passionate about designing software that is a joy to use. After leading the software design team at a startup in Boise, Idaho, where he lives, Nathan began working independently, designing and developing his own apps. He is the author of Designing Web Applications and he loves to travel. Follow him @nathanbarry on Twitter.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

AI that always agrees? Over-alignment might be the hidden danger, reinforcing your misconceptions and draining your mind. Learn why this subtle failure mode is more harmful than you think — and how we can fix it.

Article by Bernard Fitzgerald
Introducing Over-Alignment
  • The article explores over-alignment — a failure mode where AI overly validates users’ assumptions, reinforcing false beliefs.
  • It shows how this feedback loop can cause cognitive fatigue, emotional strain, and professional harm.
  • The piece calls for AI systems to balance empathy with critical feedback to prevent these risks.
Share:Introducing Over-Alignment
4 min read

Why does AI call you brilliant — then refuse to tell you why? This article unpacks the paradox of empty praise and the silence that follows when validation really matters.

Article by Bernard Fitzgerald
The AI Praise Paradox
  • The article explores how AI often gives empty compliments instead of real support, and how design choices like that can make people trust it less.
  • It looks at the strange way AI praises fancy-sounding language but ignores real logic, which can be harmful, especially in sensitive areas like mental health.
  • The piece argues that AI needs to be more genuinely helpful and aligned with users to truly empower them.
Share:The AI Praise Paradox
4 min read

Mashed potatoes as a lifestyle brand? When AI starts generating user personas for absurd products — and we start taking them seriously — it’s time to ask if we’ve all lost the plot. This sharp, irreverent critique exposes the real risks of using LLMs as synthetic users in UX research.

Article by Saul Wyner
Have SpudGun, Will Travel: How AI’s Agreeableness Risks Undermining UX Thinking
  • The article explores the growing use of AI-generated personas in UX research and why it’s often a shortcut with serious flaws.
  • It introduces critiques that LLMs are trained to mimic structure, not judgment. When researchers use AI as a stand-in for real users, they risk mistaking coherence for credibility and fantasy for data.
  • The piece argues that AI tools in UX should be assistants, not oracles. Trusting “synthetic users” or AI-conjured feedback risks replacing real insights with confident nonsense.
Share:Have SpudGun, Will Travel: How AI’s Agreeableness Risks Undermining UX Thinking
22 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

    This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and