Skip to content
UX Atlas
HeuristicExpert heuristicFoundational

Consistency and Standards

The same thing should look and behave the same way everywhere, and follow platform convention where one exists.

Definition

Nielsen's fourth heuristic. Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations or actions mean the same thing. Consistency operates internally, within your product, and externally, against platform and industry conventions.

Expert heuristic. A review criterion developed by practitioners. Useful and widely taught, but evaluated by judgement rather than measurement.

On this page
  1. Definition
  2. Four kinds of consistency, in rough order of importance
  3. In practice
  4. Sources
  5. Continue from here

Four kinds of consistency, in rough order of importance

  1. 1.Functional: the same control does the same thing everywhere. Breaking this is the most damaging.
  2. 2.Internal visual: the same meaning gets the same treatment across your product.
  3. 3.External: your product matches platform and category conventions.
  4. 4.Aesthetic: the product looks like itself. The cheapest to fix and the least costly to break.

Do

  • Encode consistency in tokens and components so it is the path of least resistance.
  • Keep one name per concept across UI, docs, support and email.
  • Follow platform conventions for platform behaviours: back, share, date pickers, keyboard shortcuts.
  • Document the intentional inconsistencies and the reasons for them.

Do not

  • Ship three button styles that mean the same thing.
  • Vary terminology between the interface and the help article.
  • Enforce identical density across genuinely different contexts.
  • Treat a component library as consistency. It is a mechanism for consistency, not a guarantee of it.

In practice

One name per concept

Product vocabulary

A product using 'workspace', 'team' and 'organisation' for the same object across UI, billing and docs generated confusion at every support touchpoint. Standardising on one word was a content change with a measurable support impact.

Justified inconsistency

Design systems

Destructive buttons deliberately break the primary button style. That is consistency of meaning, and it is more useful than consistency of appearance.

Sources

Where a source establishes something narrower than the popular reading of it, the note says so.

Each link says what the connection is, so you can tell a principle from an alternative from a thing people mix this up with.

Why this works

The reasoning this entry rests on.

Applied through

Where this shows up as a concrete interface decision.

Short definition

The one-paragraph version, for when that is all you need.

Related concept

Connected closely enough to change how you apply this.