Foolproof blog

UX500 redux

Tom Wood — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:58:15 +0000

Last July we launched the ‘UX500’ – a list of user experience opinion leaders from around the world, ranked by their social influence on the subject.

It seems to be a useful resource: the list has already received more than 20,000 visits, making it one of the most viewed Peer Index groups across all industries and disciplines.

It’s been fun to curate the group on behalf of the wider UX community. And we welcome all the comments and input we’ve had from around the world over the past six months.

New and improved

One consistent theme from the feedback we’ve received has been that some of those listed, notably in the higher reaches of the list, can’t, strictly speaking, be considered UX ‘specialists’.

So although they may often share interesting opinions and insights on UX, this is typically just one strand of a broader mix of content, within a far wider digital remit. This is a fair point, so we’re now tightening the criteria for inclusion in the UX500 so that it includes only those who can reasonably claim that UX is a core area of specialism.

This means that the likes of Mashable, Smashing Magazine, Econsultancy and New Media Age are no longer eligible for the list (though given their lofty position on numerous digital groups, we’re sure they’ll soon get over the disappointment).

Frog Design takes over the top spot and the Top 10 now includes Martin Belam (@currybet), Aral Balkan (@Aral) and Alessandro Piana Bianco (@Kurren). We hope you’ll agree this is a positive move and that the full UX500 list now better represents the worldwide UX community using social media.

We hope you’ll continue to find the UX500 an interesting and useful resource. And if you have any suggestions about how we can improve it further please let us know.

More about the UX 500 list.

Is Web Accessibility business as usual?

Leslie Fountain — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:54:27 +0000

The UK Usability Professionals’ Association (UPA) recently held its elections and we are pleased to announce that our very own Caleb Tang was elected as the Accessibility Head. Caleb joins the committee along with his colleague Tim Loo who holds the Vice President position.

Accessibility was a hot topic in the world of the web back in 2004 when the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) required service providers to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to remove any barriers that may prevent someone from using their services. To avoid doubt the act specified that this included websites (now the Equality Act 2010).

The buzz around accessibility has since quietened down, although Econsultancy’s recent report about the RNIB (Royal National Institute for the Blind) suing BMI Baby suggests it’s still very much on the agenda.

I was beginning to hope that the lack of buzz was due to accessibility being ‘business as usual’ for most organisations. With the plethora of standards and guidelines available (W3C’s Website Accessibility Initiative, BS 8878 code of practice for web accessibility and ISO 9241) it should be seamlessly incorporated into all digital projects.

We are all well aware of the moral, legal and business reasons for incorporating accessibility into any design project. It’s funny to see that some organisations still prefer to separate usability from accessibility but, in the world of the customer, they are one and the same. In fact, inclusive experience design is a more cost-effective approach; based on our experience it is 30% cheaper than separating usability and accessibility initiatives.

The direct impact of getting it right is often not obvious to brands. Consumers won’t brag about you on social networks for getting it right but trust me there will be plenty of traffic if you get it wrong (BMI Baby is a case in point).

Here are a two quick accessibility checks you can carry out on your own website:

Throw away your mouse

If you have a retail website for example, try to buy a product, starting with the home page, login and through to purchase, using your keyboard only (Some keyboard commands you might find useful).

Turn off images

If you are using Internet Explorer for example, go to Tools, Internet Options, Advanced tab and select the ‘Always expand Alt Text’ and under Multi Media untick ‘Show Images’.

Take a look at the website and see if any buttons or functional areas of the site have disappeared? Do you still have all the information you need to complete your goal?

So, if inclusive design is not business as usual for you, or you are not convinced that the basics are there, you need to start thinking about it.

Useful resources

Mobile apps: Context, context, context…

Peter Ballard — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:11:36 +0000

Long recognised as a stalwart of user-centred design, the value of understanding the “context of use” has an even greater pay-off when designing mobile applications.

And this week I had two reminders of how important that is, as I discovered a new app that illustrates this brilliantly, and reached the end of my patience with one that doesn’t.

‘My Kitchen Table’ app
First, the good one. As part of a project we’re doing in the area of fresh food online, I found an app called “My Kitchen Table”. It’s a pretty decent recipe app, with the features that you would expect such as good images, step-by-step instructions, and loading ingredients into a shopping list (although it lacks integration with any online grocer sites).

However, the real genius is that the developers have understood that one of the most important contexts of use will be in the kitchen, actually making the dish, and that having the recipe on your phone is not consistent with your hands being covered in flour/eggs/chicken giblets etc.

And they have come up with a quite brilliant solution; using the light sensor on the camera they have added an ‘air gesture’ control device, which in ‘cooking’ mode allows you to wave your hand, right-to-left, at about 15cm above the phone, to scroll to the next cooking step in the recipe.

It’s a relatively simple addition, but makes the world of difference to the experience, to a point where keeping a bunch of recipes on my phone now feels entirely practical (even more so when they make an iPad version!).

Sky sports app
I compare this with my very painful weekly reminder of poor context of use. Sky sports have an app dedicated to keeping track of football scores, giving live updates of scores from all games around the country. It’s fairly safe to assume that the main audience for the app is football supporters. It’s also a good bet that many users of that app are at football grounds around the country at 3pm on a Saturday, and this is the time they most want to keep track of what other teams around them in the table are doing. So can I get connected to the app when in a football ground? The answer is invariable always no.

Whilst this is possibly not Sky’s fault, and more to do with 3G access and volume of people needing a data connection in one place, it is still a reminder that thinking about the context in which an app is going to be used is an important part of the designer’s responsibility, and trying to develop solutions that fit the context is where success lies.

If you liked this post you may also like:

Mobile and Africa: Are smartphones really smart?

Responsive design: What it is and how it works

Caleb voted onto UK UPA Committee

Peter Ballard — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:06:32 +0000

Congratulations to Caleb Tang who has been voted onto the committee for the UK Chapter of the Usability Professionals’ Association as Accessibility Representative.

Anyone who has worked with Caleb will know how passionate he is about web accessibility and usability so this new role is the perfect opportunity for him to pass that enthusiasm onto other practitioners.

Caleb has been involved with the UPA since 2009 when he volunteered as Webmaster, helping in day-to-day website maintenance and supporting committee members. He is also an active participant at monthly events helping with communications, prep and clean-up.

He joins Tim Loo who was voted onto the committee last year as Vice President. Caleb said: “It is great to be elected and I look forward to working with the committee in supporting the UX community in the UK.”

Responsive design – what it is & how it works

Philip Morton — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:04:48 +0000

Marketers, digital designers and developers are all struggling to keep pace with the rapidly changing digital landscape and the evolving expectations and behaviours of consumers. New devices bring new challenges in designing experiences which span many devices and platforms.

In a world where the variety of internet connected devices is rapidly increasing a design technique called ‘responsive design’ offers designers and developers a forward-looking approach that, done well, provides a great user experience for users across devices.

Responsive design and how it works

Responsive design is a way of designing and building flexible websites which respond to the limitations of each platform. So, instead of having to design multiple websites for every device and platform, you create one website which automatically adapts to the device in use.

It works by using the same underlying HTML content on the page, then adjusting the CSS layout when the screen size changes. A responsive website may look different on a phone to how it looks on a tablet, but the content is static and therefore the same. Think about it like a chameleon changing its colours; it may look different depending on the environment, but it’s still the same animal underneath.

The Boston Globe website is a great example of responsive design in practice. Open it on different devices or simply resize your browser window and you can see how the layout and content adjust.

The benefits
This approach has two main benefits:

Responsive websites work on all devices, even ones that don’t exist yet, so when a new device like the Kindle Fire comes out, you don’t need to change anything on your website to support it.
It forces you to serve the same or similar content to every device and therefore creates a more consistent and richer user experience. Many mobile websites fail to address user needs because they wrongly assume the user’s intent. Mobile sites with a small subset of functionality can be useful in some situations, but often fall short in others.

The best way to build a responsive website is to start with the mobile layout, a technique often called ‘mobile first’. This encourages you to focus on a few pieces of core content and functionality, rather than having the luxury of a large screen to play with. Deciding what’s most important can be a difficult process, but the end result is a more focused product.

The drawbacks

While it’s rapidly maturing, responsive design is still a new technique and that novelty has its costs. Technical workarounds are required to adjust content such as images for different screen sizes and the workflow for building a responsive site has yet to be fully established.
It is also more time consuming to conceptualise and design a site in many different layouts at once. Greater care is required to ensure that the site and its content works well on every screen size. It is easy to forget that you’re not just designing for the desktop.

Looking forward
Responsive design will take time to mature, but it is clearly a technique which will become widespread. While a separate mobile site will remain the best option for some websites, the majority can benefit from a responsive design.

Further reading

Responsive Web Design – the article that started it all
Responsive Web Design – the book
Multi-Device Web Design: An Evolution – a comprehensive summary of the subject
“Mobile” versus “Small Screen” – about separating context from intent

EU Cookie Directive could make the web less accessible for all

Meriel Lenfestey — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:15:20 +0000

In recent months we’ve been working with several corporations to develop compliant solutions to the new EU Privacy Directive ahead of its enforcement in May next year. Our research suggests that the Directive and associated advice is a blunt instrument, which could make the web less accessible for all, unless the ICO introduce more flexibility.

In short, the Directive requires online services – which make use of cookies or similar technologies – to gain informed consent from consumers before they can use them on their website (visit ICO guidance for more information and my previous blog EU Cookie Directive and your users). This poses a huge challenge for many businesses, especially those with hundreds of cookies across multiple domains.

User behaviour and the Cookie Directive
Through primary research, we’ve identified three types of web users, which companies need to be aware of when developing solutions to this problem.

Anxious browsers: unaware of the concept of cookies and therefore very worried about the idea of files being put on their computer regardless of what good they do. These users take the opportunity to say no very quickly and are not receptive to learn more.
Comfortable browsers: aware of cookies and wonder what all the fuss is about. They will do whatever is easiest when asked whether to consent.
Private controllers: like the idea of the EU Directive because it will let them say no to cookies they see as not beneficial to them. They have a set of preconceptions, are often very sceptical of companies’ motivations and will therefore be very selective about how they give consent.

There’s very little good news in this set of behaviour types for companies providing non intrusive digital services for their customers, or for companies trying to deliver free digital services which require advertising revenue.

Users are likely to say “no” as they are not receptive to ‘education’, or they will do whatever is easiest. As the new law requires an active form of communication where an individual knowingly indicates their acceptance, this will leave many without cookies.

So, the long and short of it is that many will not accept cookies. So what?

Cookies create the magic
Cookies create the magic – they are the glue that holds your web experiences together.

Cookies are used to build narratives and store useful information to be used later so that the user feels ‘recognised’ and supported. Without cookies or similar technologies every page you visit will have no knowledge of any previous pages you visited. You will always have to be treated as a new visitor and many pieces of multipage functionality will simply not work.

This has a huge impact on the brand experience. Factor into this the implementation costs of deploying a solution which satisfies the currently published advice from the ICO and the EU working parties, and you can see why companies are in denial.

We’ve found that many companies feel as though they are being asked to deliver something unreasonable and that the impact on their businesses and their customers is out of proportion to the original goal. If all websites comply, the internet could become less accessible to everyone.

Clarifying the Cookie Directive
The ICO recently published revised guidelines to try to address some of these concerns. Although we applaud the intent and the indication of a more flexible enforcement than previously implied, the result is contradictory, and creates further confusion. This is particularly true for large corporations averse to knowingly breaking the law because it’s ‘probably not going to be strictly enforced’, at the same time as being concerned that they will lose competitive advantage through taking a more conservative approach.

To remove this confusion and achieve their goals, the ICO need to provide clarity around 2 key areas which impact any UI solutions:

Action for consent
The wording of the law and all guidance states that active, provable, informed consent is required. However, the current guidance then goes on to propose an inferred consent solution which is neither active nor provable because it could easily be ignored (and often not even seen) but still treated as consent. If inferred consent is an option the user experience design challenge changes dramatically. If this is only an option for some cookie purposes this needs to be stated.

Timing for consent
The directive states that a cookie may not be stored or accessed unless the user ‘has given his or her consent’. Although this guidance reiterates again that this means prior consent is required, it goes on to suggest that in some instances cookies could be placed provided consent is sought ASAP. Once again, from a design perspective this is a very different brief.

We’d like the ICO to go a step further than this report, and formally introduce more flexibility to the Directive whilst still achieving their primary goal of protecting web users’ privacy. We’d like them to narrow the scope of the directive based on cookie use. To restrict it to only requiring consent for storing data in cookies to support the profiling of a user over time to targeting marketing at an individual level. Caveat this with ‘except where required to do so by other legislation’ e.g. to avoid financial mis-selling. All other cookies such as those associated with delivering a smooth experience, enabling richer functionality, enhancing security, and delivering management information would just require information to be available.

Until the ICO makes such changes, we believe the majority of companies providing web based services in the UK will not attempt to comply, choosing instead to rely on the implied low enforcement, or they will do nothing and wait to see what others do and how the ICO responds (see what was being said at last year’s JUMP event about Cookies). Only the large corporations will attempt to comply in full. This will create a confusing (and often broken) web experience for end users and commercial risk for providers.

Further reading
Blog post: EU Cookie Directive and your users
Information Commissioner’s Office
Open letter on the UK implementation of Article 5(3) of the e-Privacy Directive on cookies

TV: In pursuit of effortless multi-screen viewing

Lucy Willett — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:00:22 +0000

The increase in multi-screen television viewing poses a challenge for content providers designing future viewing experiences.

Consumers now face multiple viewing options for TV and are searching for a device agnostic experience that is delivered anytime, anywhere. There are two factors that content providers must consider if they are to create truly engaging experiences:

Control
Choice

Control is central to the pursuit of effortless multi-screen viewing. Our research shows users want to control a viewing experience that is device independent and moves with them across platforms.
Consumers want their television experience seamlessly streamed regardless of time intervals and switches in device. As mobile technology evolves towards offering 4G capabilities, truly mobile viewing experiences (as opposed to in-home mobile experiences) will become more of a reality for consumers.

Control has implications for not just content and the format it is delivered in, but also in respect to the user’s social sphere and the integrated role this plays in their TV consumption habits. Viewers are now harnessing social and augmented TV platforms to broadcast programme and brand related conversations. The user seeks full control of this social and TV intertwined experience.

Driving participation through simultaneous experiences
Broadcasters and content providers recognise that, by delivering simultaneous experiences through second or multi-screen interactions, they can drive brand engagement.

The most successful examples of these to date use game play techniques such as reward, competition, and immersion, and offer users the opportunity to broadcast opinion, scores, votes and brand affinity into the social sphere. Channel 4’s Million £ Drop and Heineken’s Star Player App are well referenced two-screen experiences, however as we move in 2012 the focus for multi-channel broadcasters will be to replicate the success of these within different programme genres.

Our research in this area indicates that certain genres of programming may require a different tact to game play interactions. Genres that lend themselves to a lean back TV viewing experience (such as drama for example) may generate better engagement through using multiple screens to build knowledge around the programme, actors and storylines. This is with the intension of encouraging viewers to participate and deepen their affinity with the brand.

Future experiences need to empower users with choice
Influence is a key facet for consumers in their quest for control. When influence is considered in light of multi-screen viewing, we can see a future where users can not only affect the content that sits around the show, but can influence the live broadcast itself and the viewing behaviour of social peers.

Device proliferation also opens the door to this type of complementary experience where, essentially, users are able to control the content on one platform via another (i.e. mobile device interactions may influence the live show broadcast). This is where choice starts to become an essential design principle too. Complementary viewing paves the way for aspects of non-live programming to be chosen by the user (for example different endings), and suggests that future formats could become non-linear or expose users to completely different paths in storytelling.

Choice also underpins the success of video on demand content discovery. Schedule free TV and aggregated content mean that programme selection is more complex. While TV experiences are being designed to surface recommendations, our research indicates that serendipity is an essential factor for fulfilling consumer expectations. Users still like stumbling across programmes through channel flicking. Therefore, new digital experiences need to be designed with certain legacy behaviours in mind.

In summary, some emerging viewing experiences are allowing users to take partial ownership of control and choice. However, as TV consumption becomes more and more about devices and platform connectivity the viewer needs an experience crafted to continually endorse both control and choice as principals of design. As we look forward to arrival of 4G, mobile experiences (particularly the out-of-home mobile experience) will evolve further and the anytime, anywhere multi-screen proposition will start to become a reality.

Related links
Case study: ITV
Case study: BBC, Your Paintings

(Image source: Mild Mannered Photographer)

Education and addressing the skills gap

Nick Hatton — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:50:45 +0000

Michael Gove’s comments at the BETT show for educational technology in London yesterday that both teachers and students are ‘turned off’ by ICT lessons really struck a chord with me. However, I hope the changes go further than simply ‘computing’, which suggests a narrow focus on websites and apps and not on the wider digital world.

Students lack a basic understanding of the digital space

Over the last three years Foolproof has participated in various careers events with schools and youth organisations local to our Norwich office. On every occasion we have been astounded by the lack of basic understanding these students have about the digital, not just computing, world and the wealth of opportunities this industry offers.

Over the years we have come to realise that the students’ low level of engagement and interest is because they lack a basic understanding of how what they see on their computer or phone is designed and built, and how it fits into the world of business. They simply don’t understand what is available to them and how it may be relevant.

Keeping up with the pace of change

And it’s not the teachers fault. Even professionals working in the digital space 24/7 struggle to keep up with the rapid pace of change this industry experiences. In addition to a change in the curriculum and new resources I believe students would benefit greatly from regular guest speakers who can work within the curriculum and with teachers to deliver specific, practical classes without teachers having to swot up on something that will be out of date in a few months.

We are already experiencing a skills gap in user experience and from speaking with other members of our local digital group, Hot Source there is a similar skills gap in other fields. If this isn’t addressed now we will have more young people entering the industry immersed in using the internet and the plethora of internet-enabled devices, but unclear about how they are designed and built and the role they play in business.

Customer experience measurement: thinking beyond service

Tom Wood — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:00:30 +0000

If you want to predict positive business outcomes like loyalty, word-of-mouth advocacy and satisfaction then customer experience measures may be more effective than monitoring the outcome of service events or using a net promoter score.

That’s the view of Stan Maklan and Phil Klaus in their article ‘Customer Experience: are we measuring the right things?’ in the International Journal of Market Research (IJMR) this month.

They don’t offer a generalised model of how to measure customer experience (i.e. a framework we can all take away and apply immediately into our customer experience strategy work) but they do share a detailed case study measuring the customer experience of a UK mortgage company. This gives some strong clues about how experience measurement will evolve.

IJMR is a subscription title, so I can’t point you to a link to the full article. But here’s my own (slightly ham-fisted) summary which might pique your interest.

A brief history of marketing measurement

The last 25 years has seen a very rapid movement through three models of marketing:

Product marketing: the development and communication of consumer product brands. In this earliest phase products are king and marketing focuses on competing attributes.
Service marketing: attempting to build a relationship between the company and its customers through service. This extracts more value because it builds on top of the intrinsic utility of the company’s products.
Experience marketing: in the internet age, customer relationships become interactive (not just a database-driven CRM model as in the previous phase). Marketing becomes ‘community-centric’ rather than ‘company-centric’ and the emphasis shifts away from ‘marketing to’ customers and towards ‘marketing with’ customers.

If you accept that we’re moving into this third phase – though let’s face it, not every company has yet recognised this shift – you’re left with a measurement issue: how can you know that your customer experience is creating long-term business value?

Maklan and Klaus argue that, in the era of service marketing, the commonly used measures were flawed because they developed out of product manufacturing thinking. Instead of measuring product attributes, companies simply moved on to measuring service attributes. But there’s never been any agreement that these are predictive of long term value outcomes like loyalty, advocacy and satisfaction.

If you aren’t measuring the things that matter, you don’t fix the things that need fixing.

The measures that really count

So, what should we be measuring?

Measure the customer’s assessment of value from their own point of view, rather than against benchmarks or expectations (because actually, customers don’t usually have meaningful expectations about service).
Measure ‘value-in-use’: the extent to which customer’s utilitarian and emotional goals are met. This seems to be more predictive of long term satisfaction than checking whether a long list of product or service attributes are delivered.
Assess customer experience across time and across channels (including the period immediately before they become a customer, which is a big driver for perceived experience). Watching a relatively small group of people closely over time may work better than trying to develop a view by amalgamating data from thousands of unconnected service episodes.
Validate with behavioural measures. In other words measure long term outcomes through what people do, rather than what they say they will do.

So, should we stop measuring customer satisfaction with service events?

No; it’s clearly important that the service component of customer experience is measured and maintained. But there’s an argument that these measures alone aren’t enough because customers telling you that your service is excellent doesn’t reliably equate to long term value. We saw this ourselves in our own OSS research into Insurance. We never saw a correlation between people saying their insurance company offered good service (or indeed a good product) and their likelihood of renewing. There are wider factors at play in the decision-making process.

What factors of customer experience should we measure?

In their study Maklan and Klaus explored a number of factors and settled on four groups which seemed to be useful for predicting long term customer value outcomes.

Product experience: In particular, measures relating to customers feeling that a number of choices or product options available to them seem important.

Outcome focus: factors which show the customer felt they would be better off buying (or repeat buying) from a company rather than shopping around. ‘There might be better offers out there, but why bother when I know what I’ll get from this company and it is straightforward?’

Moments-of-truth: factors which reflect courtesy and attentiveness as well as flexibility when things go wrong.

Peace-of-mind: emotional factors about the perceived expertise of the company and the level of guidance the customer gets through a process.

Stop for a second and consider the amount of energy and focus that Amazon has always shown on these factors in their customer experience. Or Zappos. Or John Lewis.

So is that a General Model for measuring Customer experience?
Sorry, no. Maklan and Klaus are at pains to point out “…researchers will need to model customer experience for their unique context; current generic conceptualisations of experience may be too broad to be actionable.”

And this is an important take-out for me. There are plenty of people touting generalised or ‘black-box’ systems for measuring customer experience. But the truth may be that you can either have your measurement easy, cheap and wrong…or more costly and time-consuming, but genuinely predictive of long term value outcomes. That’s one for you to wrestle with.

Whatever factors are important in your own customer experience a very large number of them can probably be influenced by a well-crafted digital experience. Creating an outstanding customer experience does not necessarily require huge commitment to human service resources: just the right people at the right moments.

I suspect that the perception – often held by boards, the media and customers themselves – that great customer experience requires person-to-person contact is not correct. If we build (and measure) experiences according to the factors which really affect long term satisfaction and value we may be surprised what can be achieved in the digital channel.

Maybe if we focus on measuring and fixing the right things, companies can create better customer experience (and greater shareholder value) on a lower – not higher – cost base than the current service marketing model.

Further reading
You can read the full article by Stan Maklan and Phil Kraus by subscribing to the International Journal of Market Research (opens in a new window)
Blog post: UX Strategy and transforming the digital customer experience
Blog post: Customer experience: the new marketing battleground

Online product filtering top tips

Dan Marley — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:57:18 +0000

With the online retail world offering a wide variety of products, consumers need to be able to cut through the masses of products available in order to find the single product that they actually need.

The technological world can be hugely complex, with an ongoing game of adding small specifications to the product you want and then removing them to get the ideal product within budget. This is where filtering products becomes more of an art form. If this is not done well then users can become frustrated and bored very quickly.

Here’re my top tips for product filtering design.

Don’t forget the context
Consumers generally know what they want, and as such will apply multiple filters. Results that automatically update after each individual selection can be a great and engaging experience. However if results are not instant it can be very frustrating. It must be taken into consideration that not everyone will be on a laptop with fast broadband; some may be accessing the site through a tablet or Smartphone and therefore relying on 3G or even slower.

Show filter options relevant to your target audience
If you don’t provide filter options that appeal to your target audience they are likely to be left frustrated. Savvy tech users are less interested about colour of a laptop and more interested in graphics cards, RAM and the processor.

Prioritise the filter options
Ensure the most important/used options are at the top and all others are under ‘More options’. The use of ‘Advanced filter’ may be overwhelming for less confident consumers.

Give an indication of the number of results relating to a selection
There is nothing more frustrating than selecting a particular filter option only to discover there are no results. Provide a numbered indication in brackets alongside each filter option. When an option is selected the other numbers should dynamically update to take into consideration that selection.

Allow multiple selections
Don’t force users to select one of multiple options. Selecting more than one option should dynamically influence the number of results displayed for all the other options, as mentioned above.

Who does this well?
Some examples of well executed filtering include eBuyer.com, comet and John Lewis. For something a bit different it is worth brushing up on your Nobel Prize winners with this filtering system: elastic lists. It has a huge amount of playability as well as being very quick at dynamically updating filter options.

If you liked this you may also like
Helping users get back from a new tab
Retail & faceted search
How to improve the online shopping experience