Scarcity in UX: The psychological bias that became the norm
Short analysis on the current state of affairs and a few tips to keep in mind.
You know how it works.
Casually watching a review on Unbox Therapy about this mug that apparently is unspillable. I’m having a laugh but by the end of the video I’m also intrigued what people ask for it.
There it is on Amazon. On sale at $14.99 from $24.99. For a limited time only. Only 3 left in stock for the stainless steel version. I love stainless steel. It’s a bargain and it will soon be gone. I’ll be left to drink coffee from my spillable mug. It would be a shame to pass this. F**k it. 💸
It makes things desirable
Scarcity is the psychological bias that makes us place a higher value on things that are scarce than those in abundance. Basically, we tend to like things that are harder to obtain.
It has become the norm
As most things, scarcity started offline. Expensive restaurants serve small portions on large plates to suggest that ingredients are rare and prestigious colleges have limited places to maintain the sense of exclusivity.
But as tech businesses became more mature and digital products more refined, scarcity was quickly adopted online and it is now one of the most popular methods to increase desirability.
We have come to a point in which people are so used to seeing and expecting some form of scarcity when browsing online, that implementing one inside your product is not a competitive advantage anymore but a starting point for any goal that aims to satisfy users’ needs.
It combines multiple biases
Scarcity became popular because it’s extremely powerful and fairly easy to implement. And the reason it’s so effective is because it combines multiple biases into one:
1. Loss aversion
If we don’t act upon a scarce product, it basically means we’ll lose both the product itself in the short run but also our freedom to choose it in the long run. Double the loss = double the pain.
2. Social proof
Usually, products become scarce when the demand is high. Once that happens, it implies that other people bought it in the past so it must be valuable and we should seize the opportunity.
3. Anticipated regret
When facing a decision, we anticipate not only the events but also the associated regret we might experience. Deciding to act now is our attempt to try and eliminate that possibility.
It comes in different forms
Even though scarcity can be applied to unquantifiable features like quality or experiences, its effect is much more powerful when assessing measurable resources like objects or places. It’s the reason the likes of Amazon and Booking.com embrace it and use it extensively.
Based on these measurable resources, there are 3 main forms of scarcity:
1. Time-limited scarcity
When time has a limit, it creates a deadline that makes people act before the time is up. When the deadline is unknown, people are not certain that they can get the object anymore unless they act now, which increases the pressure but shows lack of empathy from a UX standpoint.
Examples:
Lightning Deals on Amazon: Good
They last a few hours and show the deadline. They are accompanied by the percentage claimed by other people to highlight the urgency.
Courses on Interaction Design Foundation: Smart
Present the time until enrolment ends. Fully booked courses are still displayed to show people what it’s like to miss the opportunity.
Buying things on eBay: Bad
Time limited products are marked with a red icon and a vague “Almost gone” tag. Not showing when the offer ends is unthoughtful and manipulative.
Searching places on Airbnb: Fair
It shows people how limited the offer is by displaying the low percentage of listings left and a “Rare find” tag to make them feel lucky about their search.
2. Quantity-limited scarcity
Limited or rare supplies are perceived by people as a threat to their freedom of choice, triggering a reaction to fight the threat and maintain their access to the resource.
Quantity-limited scarcity is considered more effective than time-limited scarcity because the end of the supply is unpredictable, depending exclusively on demand rather than time.
Examples:
Looking for hotels on Booking.com: Impressive
Booking is the Usain Bolt of scarcity and probably owe much of their success to it. They show the number of rooms left but also a ton of tags and labels that make you feel you’re about to make the deal of your life.
It’s smart how they use the massive data they have and, even though everything is pretty overwhelming, the information is useful.
Booking flights on Ryan Air: Good
They take advantage of the fact that cheaper seats sell first and use this to highlight the limited number of seats left for the lowest price.
Buying clothes on Selfridges: Subtle
Product details display both the available and unavailable sizes. This way, it makes the available ones feel more scarce. Subtle and useful as some people are between sizes.
3. Access-limited scarcity
It refers to limited access to features like information, groups or spaces. Research showed that censorship made people place a higher value on the restricted features than those that were not because exclusivity made them feel special.
Examples:
Becoming a subscriber on Medium
Medium charges you if you want to be able to read all the stories on their platform. But once you do, you’ll be one of their privileged users.
Joining Tinder Select
Tinder uses the “Elo” ranking system to rate members based on desirability and invites the top ones to join the closed version called Tinder Select. Even though a bit cynical for the rest of the pack, it does what it’s suppose to do: reward popular users by making them feel unique.
It is controversial but it shouldn’t be
If suitable for the product we design for, scarcity can optimise user flows and impact business goals. It reframes information and alerts users when there is a need for urgency.
Some might argue that this forces them to make a decision, but as long as the numbers are real, what’s the alternative? Isn’t the sense of regret or frustration caused by us failing to tell them about the scarce product in time just as bad? Aren’t we offering an awful user experience if that happens? Rushing people into making a decision seems rather fair as long as we’re presenting them the facts.
Having said that, I agree that some businesses take advantage of this and use it unethically by inventing fake stocks and artificial memberships. But this is true for any other method used with questionable intentions and it always leads to loss of credibility in the long run.
It should follow a few rules
To avoid this, below are some suggestions for making the best out of scarcity and actually improve the UX:
Do
- use scarcity to increase perceived value and expedite conversions
- use time scarcity to promote products that are time sensitive
- use quantity scarcity to make people aware of stock shortages
- use access scarcity to highlight the advantages of the restricted features
- use A/B testing to test what scarcity message works best for your audience
- use usability testing to test the impact of messages on credibility and trust
- use animated elements to emphasise urgency (e.g. showing a glowing red icon to highlight the real-time status)
Don’t
- do not use scarcity without testing it first with users
- do not use scarcity if stocks are not reliable
- do not use scarcity if the messages are not bug free
- do not use fake numbers to create artificially scarce products
Conclusion
Scarcity makes us place a higher value on things that are scarce and, over time, has become the go to method for increasing desirability. It is powerful because it combines multiple biases (Loss aversion, Social proof and Anticipated regret) and it comes in different forms (Time, Quantity and Access).
It is controversial but it shouldn’t be because hiding the information from people is not really an option. It can also improve UX if you follow a few simple rules.
