Adam Richardson (improperly attributed orginally to Richard Anderson — oops!) has an excellent post ruminating on when we should and should not listen to users as well as the importance of timing in innovation.

It reminded me of some of the research we did on Open Video regarding fast-forwards. We evaluated different frame rates looking at both performance (i.e. grasping the gist of the video) and subjective experience (i.e. did they feel comfortable with the speed). This research is reported in several papers. One of the more interesting outcomes was that subjective experience deteriorated much more quickly than performance. In other words, we could have people watching clips at frame rates that they thought were too fast for accurate comprehension but not see any real deterioration in performance.

This prompted a lot of discussion about what the “correct” framerate should be. If we listened to the users, the framerate should be on the slower end. But did they really know what was best? Based on our research, it seemed like we might actually know better than them. In the end, of course, it really depends on the context of use. For personal use in the context of, say, searching for a movie to watch tonight, it is better to pick a speed that people are immediately comfortable with. But in a context where speed and accuracy are of great import, say digging through security footage or quickly choosing clips during a live news cast, subjective pleasantness is less important.

As with Adam’s discussion, this post doesn’t actually lay out where the line between stupid and clever is either. But I wonder if there are specific criteria or at least rules of thumb for when designers should assume they know better than the people they are designing for. I think the fine line between stupid and clever is perhaps the same fine line between perceptive and arrogant.