As customer experience professionals, we rely heavily on Net Promoter Score (NPS) to gauge customer loyalty and satisfaction. But here’s an uncomfortable truth: your survey design might be secretly undermining the validity of your data. In this guide, we’ll explore how seemingly innocent design choices can introduce significant biases into your NPS results.

The Anatomy of a Biased Survey

Let’s start with a real-world example of how NPS surveys often go wrong. It’s not hard to imagine a survey that includes one or more of the following:

  • A leading question: “How likely are you to recommend our amazing world-changing company?”
  • A scale from 1-10 instead of 0-10
  • Reverse-ordered numbers (10 down to 1)
  • Emoji reactions for different scores
  • Color-coded buttons (green for 9-10, yellow for 7-8, red for 0-6)
  • Hover effects that make buttons “pop”
  • Leading descriptions like “I would totally recommend!” for high scores
  • Pop-up confirmations for low scores asking “Are you sure?”
  • A guilt-inducing message: “Please note: Employee bonuses depend on these scores”

Put all the wrong elements together and you might have something like this:

How likely are you to recommend our amazing world-changing company?

= I would totally recommend = I would rather walk on Legos
Thank you for your feedback!

Note: Example is purposely exaggerated to showcase the most common design faults. We do not recommend using any parts of the design in your surveys.

While these elements might seem engaging or user-friendly, each introduces its own form of bias. Let’s break down why.

Common Design Pitfalls and Their Impact

While we use NPS as an example in this article, the same design pitfalls affect other scores and metrics as well.

1. Emotional Manipulation Through Language

The Problem: Using leading phrases like “our amazing world-changing company” or mentioning that “employee bonuses depend on these scores.”

The Impact: This creates emotional pressure on respondents. The first example primes them to think positively before even considering their answer, while the second introduces guilt about potentially affecting someone’s compensation. Both compromise the integrity of the feedback.

2. Scale Manipulation

The Problem: Using a 1-10 scale instead of the standard 0-10 NPS range.

The Impact: This isn’t just a minor deviation. It fundamentally alters the NPS calculation and makes your results incomparable with industry benchmarks. You’re essentially creating your own metric while calling it NPS. Additionally, there is a good chance that the change makes your software count your NPS wrong and you will be doing it by hand later on.

Scale manipulation can also happen with using the right scale, but using colors to skew the meaning of the scale. E.g. 10 = Green, 9 = Yellow and 0-6 = Red. While the scale is correct, the coloring skews the way it works and thus manipulates the scale.

3. Reverse Ordering

The Problem: Displaying scores in descending order (10 to 0).

The Impact: This contradicts natural user expectations of ascending scales, potentially leading to confusion and misclicks. Remember, confused users don’t provide accurate feedback.

4. Interactive Design Bias

The Problem: Using hover effects that make buttons “pop” or appear more prominent.

The Impact: While intended to be engaging, these effects can subtly influence choice by making certain options feel more “clickable” or important than others. Interface design should be neutral to avoid steering users toward particular responses.

5. Hidden Negative Options

The Problem: Implementing scroll behavior that initially shows only part of the scores, requiring users to scroll to see lower scores.

The Impact: This is perhaps the most horrible form of design manipulation, as it physically hides some options from view. Many users won’t realize they can scroll to see more options, effectively turning a 0-10 scale into something else. Even users who notice the scroll may interpret it as a subtle hint that lower scores aren’t expected or desired.

6. Limited Emotional Range

The Problem: Lack of truly neutral options, with even middle scores (7-8) being marked with yellow colors or ambivalent emojis.

The Impact: This creates a false dichotomy between positive and negative feedback, pushing users toward extremes. Not every experience is exceptional or terrible – sometimes it’s just okay, and that’s valuable feedback too.

7. Visual and Emotional Cues

The Problem: Using emojis, colors, and descriptive text to associate positive emotions with high scores and negative emotions with low scores.

The Impact: This creates psychological pressure to avoid “negative” options, artificially inflating scores. Users might choose a higher score simply to avoid the “sad face” or red button.

8. Friction for Negative Feedback

The Problem: Adding confirmation steps or pop-ups for lower scores.

The Impact: This creates a barrier to honest negative feedback, suggesting to users that their genuine experience is somehow “wrong.” It’s the survey equivalent of asking “Are you sure?” when someone disagrees with you.

The Real Cost of Biased Survey Design

The consequences of these design choices extend far beyond skewed numbers:

  1. False Positives: When your survey design pushes users toward higher scores, you’re creating an echo chamber of artificial positivity. This can mask real problems that need attention.
  2. Lost Insights: By discouraging honest negative feedback, you miss crucial opportunities for improvement. Remember, detractors often provide the most valuable feedback for business growth.
  3. Damaged Trust: Sophisticated customers can recognize manipulative design elements, potentially damaging their trust in your brand’s commitment to genuine feedback.
  4. Misguided Strategy: When decisions are based on inflated NPS scores, resources may be misallocated, and real problems might go unaddressed.

Best Practices for Unbiased NPS Survey Design

Do:

  • Use neutral language in your survey question: “How likely are you to recommend [Company Name]?”
  • Use a standard 0-10 scale in ascending order
  • Maintain neutral visual design across all score options
  • Provide clear, equal spacing between all options
  • Allow true neutral responses without negative connotations
  • Make all options immediately visible without scrolling
  • Ensure the full scale is displayed in a single view
  • Design mobile-responsive surveys that maintain full scale visibility
  • Include open-ended follow-up questions for all scores
  • Test your survey design with diverse user groups

Don’t:

  • Use leading or emotionally charged language in questions
  • Mention employee incentives or consequences
  • Add interactive effects that make some options more prominent
  • Use colors to indicate “good” or “bad” scores
  • Hide any score options behind scrolling or click interactions
  • Implement horizontal scroll that obscures lower scores
  • Design layouts that require any interaction to see the full scale
  • Add emotional triggers like emojis or leading descriptions
  • Create extra steps or friction for lower scores
  • Alter the standard NPS scale or calculation method
  • Use language that suggests certain scores are preferred

Conclusion

Your NPS survey is a crucial tool for understanding customer sentiment, but its value depends entirely on the quality of data it collects. By eliminating design biases, you create an environment where customers feel comfortable providing honest feedback, both positive and negative. Remember, the goal isn’t to achieve the highest possible NPS score; it’s to gather accurate insights that drive meaningful improvements in your customer experience.

Take a critical look at your current NPS survey design. Are you inadvertently introducing biases that could be skewing your results? The path to better customer experience starts with better measurement.

Did you like the post?

Surveypal

Everything you need to lead and improve your customer experience. Learn more at surveypal.com, or

Similar Posts