Understanding the power of the Goldilocks Effect
I have a passion for design patterns. I like to understand the reasons why certain patterns work and dislike using conventions without knowing why they have become successful.
Recently I’ve found myself interested in the psychology of persuasion and the ways in which certain techniques have infiltrated the web. One such technique is the “Goldilocks Effect”. I’ve been aware of it for a while but had only ever thought of it as just another design pattern and hadn’t necessarily thought to understand the psychology behind it.
What is the Goldilocks Effect?
The term ‘goldilocks effect’ derives from the children’s story “Goldilocks and the Three Bears”. In the story Goldilocks decides, amongst other things, to eat one of three bowls of porridge; the first being too hot, the next too cold, but the final one she picks for being “just right”.
This, in a nutshell, is what the term goldilocks effect or ‘goldilocks pricing’ refers to. It is used to describe the practice of providing a premium as well as a budget option alongside the regularly priced product to make the standard option seem more appealing. A good example of this is the basic pricing structure adopted by most airlines. They encourage customers to see business class as good value by offering higher priced first class and economy options alongside it. A more everyday example can be seen in all mainstream coffee shops where the options range from small (tall) to large (venti), with regular (grande) in-between. The goal of this type of pricing is to push people who might usually buy the cheapest into buying a more expensive option.
“Third-class railway carriages in Victorian England are said to have been built without windows, not so much to punish third-class customers (for which there was no economic incentive), as to motivate those who could afford second-class seats to pay for them instead of taking the cheaper option.” Wikipedia
This technique for encouraging a more favourable transaction exploits our psychological aversion to extremes (a type of cognitive bias). Basically you can manipulate people into choosing the option that yields the greatest profit by providing them with three options (e.g. small, medium, large) as long as the item you wish to sell the most of is centered within the range.
Interestingly some economists have argued that the goldilocks effect constitutes a form of ‘pricing discrimination’ where premium pricing to encourage people to upgrade their purchases leads to providers intentionally worsening the quality of their ‘basic’ products to fit the model.
I witnessed the goldilocks effect in action last year when user testing a travel insurance website. Following the quote process the participants where presented with 3 options, and even though most of them had mentioned price as a key factor in their decision making when purchasing insurance the vast majority commented that, even though there was very little difference between the products, they were more likely to purchase standard or premium over the cheapest option as they felt that by doing so they would be “even more insured”. Interestingly some users went as far as to show distrust, not of the brand, but of the lesser option.
Three is the magic number
Although in the children’s story Goldilocks is confronted by three options the pricing technique doesn’t necessarily have to be limited to that number. It does, however, make sense to limit the options as there’s less chance of overwhelming the customer with choice while also providing just enough for the technique to achieve its desired result.
Goldilocks and the four bears
While looking for examples I found a couple of instances were four products were shown. Rather than just show each option equally alongside the next, one of the central items would be highlighted as the ideal or ‘most popular’ choice. By visually separating out one of the central options they reduce the chance of choice paralysis. I accept that choosing from only four options is not exactly excessive but I do believe it has had enough of an effect for the companies to feel it necessary to highlight one.
How to use the Goldilocks Effect successfully
So how can you utilise our natural aversion to extremes to encourage a transaction? I don’t consider myself an expert in this but I thought I’d share some of the ways I think you can use the goldilocks effect.
- Limit the number of options – ideally keep it limited to 3, although more can clearly work, too many could cause choice paralysis.
- Clearly show the comparison between each product – make the users choice clear by placing each option side by side
- Highlight the similarities and differences between the features and benefits – make sure the differences between each option is clearly displayed; what are the features or benefits? How is the higher price justified?
- Ensure product labels follow a consistent theme – SurveyMonkey for example use basic, pro and unlimited. Getsignoff uses audience types; freelancer, team or agency. With Getsignoff there is in-fact a forth option (free) but they choose not to place this alongside the paid for services.
- Use social proof to support the sell – as shown in the Basecamp example above highlight which option is the ‘most popular’ with your customers. By emphasising the choice made by the majority of people it reinforces that the middle option is the best, if everyone else is choosing it, it must be right.
I hope you’ve found this introduction useful. If you’d like to see more examples of the goldilocks effect in action I’ve put together a collection which I’ll be updating so If you know of any other examples please feel free to share them.
Update 27/10/2010
I’ve put together a collection of examples of the goldilocks pricing pattern on UI-Patterns.com so please check it out.




Jeff Yoak
September 28th 2010A related concept that you may find interesting is the Decoy Effect. It can be considerably more powerful than the Goldilocks effect you describe here in creating preference for a “middle” choice over a bottom choice.
Wikipedia is a good place to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoy_effect
If the game theory terms asymmetric and strict dominance, etc., are daunting, just walk through the example. I think it is clear on its own.
Rian
September 28th 2010Very interesting stuff, although I’m not convinced that you have to have only 3 options. It would be interesting if we could convince 37signals to run a test on Basecamp to see if it increases sales if they take away one option
The psychology behind this is also covered by Dan Ariely in his book “Predictably Irrational” – very good read. His blog is at http://danariely.com/
Jake
September 28th 2010A very interesting and worthwhile read as always! I cannot believe I have never noticed this technique before; clearly I have much to learn!
Thanks for another great post Paul
Jake
Tweets that mention Shortboredsurfer – Understanding the power of the Goldilocks Effect -- Topsy.com
September 28th 2010[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Wilson, Andy Gongea, Paul Seys, Paul Seys, ux books and others. ux books said: Understanding the power of the Goldilocks Effect http://t.co/guKNJEH [...]
Tweets that mention Shortboredsurfer – Understanding the power of the Goldilocks Effect -- Topsy.com
September 29th 2010[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by David Travis and Bart Hilhorst, Jason Ward. Jason Ward said: Predictably Irrational you say? The 'Goldilocks' Effect – http://bit.ly/b0WL3G via @userfocus Nice bite-sized read. [...]
Blake
October 6th 2010Nice post and particularly relevant where consumers are locked into or dedicated to one seller/supplier. It all gets a bit more confusing when (as if often the case) consumers are not just making their decision based on one seller but are looking at multiple suppliers/sellers.
Take your insurance provider example. I’m not sure how your study was structured but I know from some research I did around buying insurance online that what people often do is go to one site to get an idea of the cost and then check out other providers. This is where your point about “Highlight the similarities and differences between the features and benefits – make sure the differences between each option is clearly displayed; what are the features or benefits? How is the higher price justified?” can be even more important.
Paul
October 7th 2010Thanks for the feedback, guys.
I know where you’re coming from Blake, and I agree that decisions people make are a little more complex than I allude to within this post. The study I carried out purely looked at the experience of using the clients process and not wider behaviours. As you say there is added complexity with people comparing not only between products within a range but between different brands.
I put this post together simply to look at the way we try to influence purchase behaviour within a UI but I take your point on board. Thanks again for the feedback, it’s really appreciated.
Persuasion Triggers in Web Design - Smashing Magazine
November 29th 2010[...] sole aim is to make everything else near it look like a relative bargain. Another example is the Goldilocks effect where you provide users with three alternative choices. However, two of the choices are decoys: one [...]
Persuasion Triggers in Web Design – via Smashing Magazine
December 8th 2010[...] sole aim is to make everything else near it look like a relative bargain. Another example is the Goldilocks effect22 where you provide users with three alternative choices. However, two of the choices are decoys: [...]
Persuasion Triggers in Web Design | i know idea
December 9th 2010[...] sole aim is to make everything else near it look like a relative bargain. Another example is the Goldilocks effect where you provide users with three alternative choices. However, two of the choices are decoys: one [...]
Persuasive web design « Interaction design
December 13th 2010[...] – Adding unattractive options makes other options more attractive > Goldilocks pricing effect (also here) [...]