Why it's time to banish the term 'users'

By Cynthia Sipes, User Experience Researcher

As user researchers, we're pretty familiar with the term 'users'. Coined when computers first came on the scene, it's been around for a long while, and has a well-established place in technical and development settings.

But while the term makes sense when people are actually using something, like software, in UX, we’re relatively comfortable using the term more generally, as a catch-all for anyone, in general terms, doing something online.?

Which doesn't feel right. Because our 'users' actually aren't often users at all - they're people. And neglecting to think of them as such could actually be stopping us doing our jobs properly.?

What's the problem with 'users'?

Consider the ultimate purpose of UX and user research. In simple terms, it's to understand what an experience is like for a person who is trying to do or use something, and to then use that insight to improve their experience.??

It's our job to test the experience, gain insight from the data, form recommendations, and then relay them to the creators of that experience. In other words, it's about building empathy - an understanding of both what it's like to be in another person's shoes, and what impacts their mindset and behaviours.?

Still with us? Okay. Now for a thought experiment:

Imagine, as clearly and vividly as you can, a user.

Start broad - perhaps with their age or gender - and then get more specific: what do they think about when they wake up, or look forward to at the end of the day? What do they find easy, and what do they find difficult? What motivates or discourages them from trying again? What's their favourite shape of pasta??

Rigatoni aside, we bet you found that challenging. Which makes sense - because the term 'user' is so unspecific, it could refer to almost anyone at all. And you can't build empathy with the whole world.?

Don Norman, a cognitive scientist who joined Apple back in the 1990s, put this concept succinctly when he spoke to MIT Technology Review about the use of the word 'user':

"Psychologists depersonalize the people they study by calling them 'subjects.' We depersonalize the people we study by calling them 'users.' Both terms are derogatory," he wrote.

Let's try again. This time, replace the word user with 'teacher', 'doctor', 'reader', or 'parent', instead.?

You won't have a full picture, of course, or certainly not a reliable one (read our piece on why personas are flawed, too), but you’ll likely have a rough shape or sketchy outline of characteristics in mind.?

Importantly, compared to the word user, you're likely to have a clearer idea of the relationship the individual or collective group may have to whatever experience it is you're trying to test. And that's because specific terms help build a picture you can relate to.?

Again, Don Norman puts it well:

"In gaming, for instance, users are typically called "players," a word that acknowledges their participation and even pleasure in their relationships with the technology. On an airplane, customers are often called "passengers" or "travelers," evoking a spirit of hospitality as they're barrelled through the skies."

User researchers as advocates

With the above in mind, using the term 'users' could actually fight against what we, as user researchers, are trying to encourage our clients to do.?

We know that the people who are building websites are not the people who are using websites. We also know that the term 'user' doesn’t help illustrate the human qualities of another person. Finally, we know that building understanding of that other person is fundamental to being able to improve their experience.?

But how can we expect our clients to make that leap, and lean into understanding someone else, if we're not using language that advocates for that person's individuality?

So, what needs to change?

It's important that we, as user researchers and UX professionals, think about our language in general - both in report writing, and in the way that we talk about people.?

When sharing research, we should focus not just on the data, but on the narrative and story that surrounds the 'user' (read: person's) experience. Sharing specific examples of who people are and what issues they face helps create stories that can ultimately bring a greater depth of understanding and better outcome.?

If we're ultimately here to advocate for 'users', it's probably time to stop referring to them as that. To go back to Don Norman one final time, "if we are designing for people, why not call them that?" We couldn't agree more.