Current UI/UX dogma is tainted, to put it bluntly.
It's been A/B tested and optimised to death not to empower the user, but to disempower them. The push to get the user to click on the "subscribe"/"buy now" button, or to stay engaged with the app so that you can keep pouring ads down their eyeballs, is an overriding concern.
In contrast, 90s/2000s research was all about empowering users, acknowledging psychological limitations so that you can work around them to let people work more efficiently, and making your workspace/playspace your own. Modern UI/UX is a near opposition of that.
>Current UI/UX dogma is tainted, to put it bluntly.
I would agree with this statement but only outside of academia. UI/UX dogma in academia is still about proper user experience design and it's simply being taken advantage of by companies looking to cash in on users. That doesn't make the dogma flawed but I can see how that would make you say it's tainted.
It's been A/B tested and optimised to death not to empower the user, but to disempower them. The push to get the user to click on the "subscribe"/"buy now" button, or to stay engaged with the app so that you can keep pouring ads down their eyeballs, is an overriding concern.
In contrast, 90s/2000s research was all about empowering users, acknowledging psychological limitations so that you can work around them to let people work more efficiently, and making your workspace/playspace your own. Modern UI/UX is a near opposition of that.