| name | design-philosophies |
| description | Use when running a heuristic evaluation, structuring a design critique, selecting which design framework to apply for a given project context, or auditing a UI against Gestalt/Nielsen/Rams principles. |
| metadata | {"references":["references/apple-hig.md","references/design-thinking.md","references/dieter-rams-principles.md","references/emotional-design.md","references/gestalt-principles.md","references/material-design.md","references/nielsen-heuristics.md"]} |
Design Philosophies
Philosophy Selection Framework
| Context | Primary | Supporting |
|---|
| New product, unclear users | Design Thinking | JTBD, HCD |
| Complex information display | Gestalt | Nielsen |
| Premium/luxury | Emotional Design + Rams | Apple HIG |
| Enterprise SaaS | Nielsen | Material, Inclusive |
| Consumer mobile | Apple HIG / Material | Gestalt, Emotional |
| Accessibility-first | Inclusive | WCAG 2.2, Nielsen |
| Developer tool | Rams ("less but better") | Nielsen, Gestalt |
| Content platform | Gestalt + Emotional | Apple HIG |
| E-commerce | Nielsen | Emotional, Gestalt |
| Design system | Rams + Gestalt | Material, Inclusive |
Decision rule: pick one primary as backbone; use supporting frameworks only to fill gaps the primary leaves unaddressed.
Heuristic Evaluation Template (Nielsen)
# Heuristic Evaluation: <product/flow>
Evaluator: <name> Date: <YYYY-MM-DD> Scope: <screens or task>
## Findings
| # | Heuristic | Severity (0-4) | Location | Issue | Recommendation |
|---|-----------|----------------|----------|-------|----------------|
| 1 | H1 Visibility of system status | 3 | Checkout step 2 | No spinner during 4s payment call | Show inline progress + disable submit |
| 2 | H5 Error prevention | 4 | Account delete | One-click, irreversible | Add typed-confirmation modal |
...
## Severity scale
0=not a problem · 1=cosmetic · 2=minor · 3=major · 4=catastrophic
## Summary
- Total findings: N
- Severity ≥3: M (must fix before ship)
- Top 3 systemic patterns: ...
Rule: every finding cites a specific heuristic number; recommendations reference the same principle.
Design Critique Output Format
# Critique: <artifact>
Philosophy applied: <primary> Supporting: <list>
## Strengths (3-5)
- [Principle name] What works and why, tied to principle
## Issues (ranked by severity)
1. [Principle name] Specific issue → concrete fix
2. ...
## Open questions
- ...
## Validation
- [ ] Every recommendation cites which principle it derives from
- [ ] No recommendation contradicts the chosen primary philosophy
- [ ] Severity rated; top item is a must-fix
Gestalt Layout Checklist
Run against any composed screen:
Worked Example (input → output)
Input UI (ASCII):
[Logo] Home Products About [Sign in] [Sign up]
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Welcome!
[search...........................] <- centered, isolated
New arrivals <- left
[img] $19 [img] $24 [img] $29
[img] $39 [img] $44 [img] $49
Save 20% on first order! <- floating banner top-right red
Philosophy Selection: e-commerce → Primary: Nielsen · Supporting: Emotional Design, Gestalt.
Critique:
| # | Principle | Sev | Issue → Recommendation |
|---|
| 1 | Nielsen H1 | 3 | "Save 20%" floats untethered → anchor to grid, add countdown (Emotional/visceral) |
| 2 | Gestalt Proximity | 3 | Centered search, left-aligned products imply unrelated → left-align OR add label |
| 3 | Nielsen H4 | 2 | Sign in/Sign up both gray → promote Sign up to primary intent |
| 4 | Gestalt Similarity | 2 | Inconsistent price formatting → enforce $XX.00 |
| 5 | Rams #4 | 1 | "Welcome!" carries no info → value-prop subtitle |
Each row cites principle; severity drives ship/no-ship.
Decision Rules & Pitfalls
- Don't mix Material + Apple HIG in one product — pick one metaphor.
- Rams "less, but better" ≠ minimalism-as-style; it is reduction to essentials.
- Design Thinking is for ambiguous problems; if well-defined, skip to Prototype.
- Emotional/visceral cannot compensate for a broken behavioral layer.
- Inclusive Design ≠ WCAG (floor); inclusive treats diversity as resource.
Validation Step
Before sign-off:
- Every recommendation cites a principle from the chosen primary or a named supporting framework.
- No recommendation violates a Rams principle (especially #6 honest, #2 useful).
- Heuristic severities ≥3 are tracked as blockers.
- If a recommendation derives from a supporting philosophy that contradicts the primary, flag for explicit decision.
References
Next Steps
