| A |
|---|
| Aesthetic–usability effect | The tendency of people to judge a better-looking interface as easier to use, whether or not it is. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127–145. doi ↗
- Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2010). Universal principles of design (Rev. and updated ed.). Rockport Publishers.
|
|---|
| Affordance | A relationship between the properties of an object and the abilities of the person using it, which determines how it could be used (Norman, 2013). | | - Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. and expanded ed.). Basic Books. basicbooks.com ↗
- Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
- Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–43. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Alternative text (alt text) | A short written description attached to an image, read aloud by screen readers and shown when the image fails to load. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 (W3C Recommendation). w3.org ↗
- Horton, S., & Quesenbery, W. (2013). A web for everyone: Designing accessible user experiences. Rosenfeld Media.
|
|---|
| Assistive technology | Hardware or software that people with disabilities use to operate a computer or read its content, such as screen readers, screen magnifiers, switch devices and voice control. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 (W3C Recommendation). w3.org ↗
- Horton, S., & Quesenbery, W. (2013). A web for everyone: Designing accessible user experiences. Rosenfeld Media.
|
|---|
| Atomic design | A mental model of interfaces as built from atoms, molecules, organisms, templates and pages, which treats a screen as both a whole and a set of shared parts (Frost, 2016). | | |
|---|
| Attention budget | This guide's name for the limited working memory a user has, shared between the task and the interface. | | - Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. doi ↗
- Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. doi ↗
- Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), Article 8. doi ↗
|
|---|
| C |
|---|
| Chunking | Grouping separate items into a few meaningful units, as with the blocks of a phone number, so that more can be held in working memory. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. doi ↗
- Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Cognitive load | The demand a task places on working memory (Sweller, 1988). | | - Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. doi ↗
- Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296. doi ↗
- Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Coherence principle | People learn better when extraneous material is excluded rather than included (Mayer, 2024). | | - Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), Article 8. doi ↗
- Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi ↗
- Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 707–734. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Colour contrast ratio | A measure from 1:1 to 21:1 of the difference in brightness between text and its background. WCAG level AA asks for at least 4.5:1 for normal-sized text. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 (W3C Recommendation). w3.org ↗
|
|---|
| Component | A reusable interface part, such as a button or text field, with agreed behaviour and code. | | |
|---|
| Contribution model | The published route by which teams propose, build and add new parts to a design system. | | - Government Digital Service. (n.d.-a). Contribution criteria. GOV.UK Design System. Retrieved September 17, 2026, from design-system.service.gov.uk ↗
- Government Digital Service. (n.d.-b). Community. GOV.UK Design System. Retrieved September 17, 2026, from design-system.service.gov.uk ↗
- Noakes, A., & Paul, T. (2017). Building the GOV.UK Design System. Government Digital Service blog. gds.blog.gov.uk ↗
|
|---|
| D |
|---|
| Design system | A product that holds an organisation's shared interface decisions, parts, guidance and code, with a team that maintains them. | | |
|---|
| Design token | A named design decision, such as a colour or spacing value, stored once and used everywhere (Design Tokens Community Group, 2025). | | - Curtis, N. (2016). Tokens in design systems. EightShapes. medium.com ↗
- Design Tokens Community Group. (2025). Design tokens format module 2025.10 (Final Community Group Report). W3C Community Group. designtokens.org ↗
|
|---|
| DesignOps | The orchestration and optimisation of people, processes and craft to increase the value and impact of design at scale (Kaplan, 2019). | | - Kaplan, K. (2019). DesignOps 101. Nielsen Norman Group. nngroup.com ↗
- Kaplan, K. (2020). DesignOps maturity: Low in most organizations. Nielsen Norman Group. nngroup.com ↗
|
|---|
| F |
|---|
| Federated model | A way of owning a design system in which a representative, empowered subset of designers and leaders from product teams shape it together, with a central group to document and maintain it (Curtis, 2015). R14 A model in which the teams closest to data own it, and a central group sets standards they follow. | | - DAMA International. (2017). DAMA-DMBOK: Data management body of knowledge (2nd ed.). Technics Publications. damadmbok.org ↗
- Curtis, N. (2015). Team models for scaling a design system. EightShapes. medium.com ↗
- Dehghani, Z. (2022). Data mesh: Delivering data-driven value at scale. O'Reilly Media.
|
|---|
| Fitts's law | The time to reach a target depends on its size and distance, so a large, clearly labelled primary action is easier to hit (Fitts, 1954). | | - Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47(6), 381–391. doi ↗
- Budiu, R. (2022). Fitts's law and its applications in UX. Nielsen Norman Group. nngroup.com ↗
|
|---|
| G |
|---|
| Gestalt principles | Rules describing how people see separate visual elements as groups, such as proximity, similarity and closure. Designers use them to show which parts of a screen belong together. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II. Psychologische Forschung, 4(1), 301–350. doi ↗
- Johnson, J. (2020). Designing with the mind in mind: Simple guide to understanding user interface design guidelines (3rd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Gulfs of execution and evaluation | The gap between what a user wants to do and what the system lets them do, and the gap between the system's state and the user's ability to see and interpret it. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. and expanded ed.). Basic Books. basicbooks.com ↗
- Hutchins, E. L., Hollan, J. D., & Norman, D. A. (1985). Direct manipulation interfaces. Human–Computer Interaction, 1(4), 311–338. doi ↗
|
|---|
| H |
|---|
| Heuristic evaluation | A review in which evaluators check an interface against a set of usability principles (Nielsen & Molich, 1990). | | - Nielsen, J., & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 249–256). ACM. doi ↗
- Nielsen, J. (1994). Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 152–158). ACM. doi ↗
- Nielsen, J. (2024). 10 usability heuristics for user interface design. Nielsen Norman Group. (Original work published 1994) nngroup.com ↗
|
|---|
| Hick's law | The finding that choice reaction time rises with the number of alternatives; a reason to make the main action stand out, not a rule to cut every menu down (Hick, 1952). | | - Hick, W. E. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4(1), 11–26. doi ↗
- Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45(3), 188–196. doi ↗
- Liu, W., Gori, J., Rioul, O., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., & Guiard, Y. (2020). How relevant is Hick's law for HCI? In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–11). ACM. doi ↗
|
|---|
| I |
|---|
| Inclusive design | Designing so that the widest range of people can use a product, by considering from the start those most likely to be excluded by disability, language, age or circumstance. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Holmes, K. (2018). Mismatch: How inclusion shapes design. MIT Press. doi ↗
- Horton, S., & Quesenbery, W. (2013). A web for everyone: Designing accessible user experiences. Rosenfeld Media.
|
|---|
| Information architecture | The way a product's content is organised, labelled and linked so that people can find what they need and understand where they are. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Rosenfeld, L., Morville, P., & Arango, J. (2015). Information architecture: For the web and beyond (4th ed.). O'Reilly Media.
|
|---|
| Information scent | The cues in a link, label or heading that tell a user how likely it is to lead to what they are looking for. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643–675. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Intrinsic load | Load caused by the complexity of the material itself. | | - Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296. doi ↗
- Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. doi ↗
|
|---|
| M |
|---|
| Miller's law | The much-quoted claim that people can hold about seven items in short-term memory. Later research puts the limit nearer four chunks, and it is not a rule for menu length. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. doi ↗
- Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. doi ↗
- Yablonski, J. (2020). Laws of UX: Using psychology to design better products & services. O'Reilly Media.
|
|---|
| Mobile first | Designing for the smallest screen and slowest connection first, then adding to the design for larger screens, which forces early decisions about what matters most. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Wroblewski, L. (2011). Mobile first. A Book Apart.
|
|---|
| P |
|---|
| Pattern | A reusable solution to a common user task, such as signing in, built from components. R06 An observation that repeats across people or sessions, reported with a count. | | - Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi ↗
- Frost, B. (2016). Atomic design. Brad Frost Web. atomicdesign.bradfrost.com ↗
- Government Digital Service. (n.d.-a). Contribution criteria. GOV.UK Design System. Retrieved September 17, 2026, from design-system.service.gov.uk ↗
|
|---|
| Pattern library | A catalogue of an organisation's interface components and patterns, with examples and guidance on use. It is one part of a design system. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Frost, B. (2016). Atomic design. Brad Frost Web. atomicdesign.bradfrost.com ↗
- Kholmatova, A. (2017). Design systems: A practical guide to creating design languages for digital products. Smashing Media.
|
|---|
| S |
|---|
| Screen reader | Software that reads out the content and controls of a screen as speech, or sends them to a braille display, for people who are blind or have low vision. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 (W3C Recommendation). w3.org ↗
- Horton, S., & Quesenbery, W. (2013). A web for everyone: Designing accessible user experiences. Rosenfeld Media.
|
|---|
| Seductive details | Interesting and irrelevant information added to a lesson; learners given it tended to perform worse than those who learned without it (Sundararajan & Adesope, 2020). | | - Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 707–734. doi ↗
- Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), Article 8. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Semantic versioning | A version numbering scheme of major, minor and patch numbers that signals whether a release breaks existing use (Preston-Werner, n.d.). | | - Preston-Werner, T. (n.d.). Semantic versioning 2.0.0. Retrieved September 17, 2026, from semver.org ↗
- Government Digital Service. (n.d.-c). Versioning [GOV.UK Frontend documentation]. GitHub. Retrieved September 17, 2026, from github.com ↗
|
|---|
| Signifier | Any perceivable indicator that communicates appropriate behaviour to a person (Norman, 2013). | | - Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. and expanded ed.). Basic Books. basicbooks.com ↗
- Norman, D. A. (2008). Signifiers, not affordances. Interactions, 15(6), 18–19.
|
|---|
| Slips and mistakes | Two kinds of user error. A slip is the right intention carried out wrongly, such as a mis-tap; a mistake is the wrong intention, formed from a faulty understanding. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. and expanded ed.). Basic Books. basicbooks.com ↗
- Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambridge University Press. doi ↗
|
|---|
| Spatial contiguity principle | People learn better when words and pictures are presented near rather than far from each other on the page or screen (Mayer, 2024). | | - Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), Article 8. doi ↗
- Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi ↗
|
|---|
| U |
|---|
| User experience (UX) | A person's perceptions and responses that result from using, or expecting to use, a product, system or service. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. and expanded ed.). Basic Books. basicbooks.com ↗
- International Organization for Standardization. (2019). Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (ISO 9241-210:2019).
|
|---|
| UX writing | Writing the words inside an interface, such as button labels, error messages and instructions, so that users can complete their task. The short pieces of text are often called microcopy. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - Podmajersky, T. (2019). Strategic writing for UX: Drive engagement, conversion, and retention with every word. O'Reilly Media.
|
|---|
| W |
|---|
| WAI-ARIA | A W3C specification of attributes added to web code to tell assistive technology the role, name and state of interface parts that plain HTML cannot describe. | - R08UX foundations and design systemsFrom the field · not in the guide
| - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.2 (W3C Recommendation).
|
|---|
| Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) | The World Wide Web Consortium's accessibility standard; version 2.2 sets minimums such as 4.5:1 contrast for normal text and 24 by 24 CSS pixel targets (World Wide Web Consortium, 2023). R05 The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines; version 2.2 became a W3C Recommendation in October 2023, and meeting it does not address every user need (World Wide Web Consortium, 2023). | | - World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 (W3C Recommendation). w3.org ↗
- W3C Web Accessibility Initiative. (2024). Involving users in evaluating web accessibility. w3.org ↗
|
|---|
| Working memory | The small, temporary store in which people hold and work on information. | | - Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. doi ↗
- Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. doi ↗
|
|---|