Scarcity, in its simplest form, is the condition of being in limited supply. Think of the “last one in stock” sign at your favorite store. You see it, and a little voice inside your head says, “I better grab this NOW, or I’ll regret it for the rest of my life.” But why? It’s a basic human reaction: we crave what we can’t easily have. Economists call this the scarcity principle, and it’s the reason why people will sometimes pay absurd amounts of money for things that are limited or exclusive. The rarer something is, the more we think it’s valuable. Scarcity works-not just for products, but for information, too. We can read about trends in the computer industry online by searching for articles on Google. Or we can subscribe to a pricey series of reports that cost a lot of money and only a relatively few people get. Which source of information will we think is more accurate? More valuable? Which source will we use when it is time to take action? If we think that information is hard to come by, then we see that information as being more valuable.
Now, how does scarcity sneak its way into the digital world of web design? Well, let’s think about your website: You’re trying to catch the attention of your visitors and convert them into loyal customers or users. What better way to do this than to make some information hard to come by? We’re not talking about hiding the entire website behind a paywall (unless you’re feeling especially bold)—we’re talking about strategically creating a sense of urgency and exclusivity. This is where web design meets the brain, and it’s like using magic to trick your visitors into making decisions you want them to make. Using the principles of neuro design, you can tap into people’s subconscious to guide them toward certain actions (like clicking that sweet “Buy Now” button). The sense of neurodesign is not to trick the mind but to use it’s structure to your advantage, if you know it ofcourse. Three principles you can elaborate on when it comes to designing your website could be:
FOMO (Fear of Missing Out): Humans are wired to avoid loss. Scarcity creates a sense of urgency, and urgency triggers action. For example, a countdown timer showing “Only 3 hours left!” on a limited-time offer is like a red flag that says, “Do it now or regret it later.”
Social Proof: When visitors see that a product is scarce, they assume it must be in high demand. Your website could say something like, “500 people have viewed this offer in the last 24 hours.” This combines scarcity with social proof, making the offer even more irresistible.
Contrast: Let’s say you have two subscription plans. One is priced at $10, and the other at $100. The $100 plan offers access to an exclusive service, and it’s the rare one—scarcity kicks in. Suddenly, the $10 plan seems… meh, not as special. The high-priced, scarce option feels like a premium choice, which is exactly what you want your users to think. the task at hand, navigating smoothly through content without being interrupted by unnecessary delays. By optimizing page speed, designers can help users maintain their flow and reduce the cognitive strain caused by waiting.
WHICH COOKIES TASTE BEST?
Worchel, Lee and Adewole (1975) asked people to rate chocolate chip cookies. They put 10 cookies in one jar and two of the same cookies in another jar. The cookies from the two-cookie jar received higher ratings-even though the cookies were exactly the same! Not only that, but if there were a lot of cookies in the jar, and then a short time later most of the cookies were gone, the cookies that were left received an even higher rating than cookies that were in a jar where the number of cookies didn’t change Social validation and scarcity work together (Something we already clarified as: The Power of Social Validation). If we think lot of other people liked the cookies and that there aren’t many cookies left, it creates an even stronger pull to action. the task at hand, navigating smoothly through content without being interrupted by unnecessary delays. By optimizing page speed, designers can help users maintain their flow and reduce the cognitive strain caused by waiting.
ONLY A SELECT FEW KNOW THIS
Iyengar and Lepper (2000) tested the theory that if we’re provided with 100 many choices, we don’t choose at all. Experimenters set up booths at a busy upscale grocery store in California, and posed as store employees. They alternated the product selections on the table. Half of the time, there were six choices of fruit jam for shoppers to taste. Half of the time, there were 24 jars of jam to taste. Did it make a difference how many jars there were? Yes, it did. When there were 24 jars of jam on the table, 60 percent of shoppers passing the table stopped and tasted jam. When there were six jars of jam on the table, only 40 percent stopped to taste. So does that mean that more choices are a good thing? You would think that people would taste more varieties of jam when the table had 24 flavors. But they didn’t. People tasted one to two varieties, whether there were six or 24 choices available. And how did varying the selection influence purchases? Of the shoppers who stopped at the table with six jars, 30 percent actually purchased the brand of jam they had tried. Of those who stopped at the table with 24 jars, only three percent purchased jam.
So what do we learn from this? A bigger selection attracted a bigger crowd, but that crowd purchased fewer products than the group presented with fewer choices. the task at hand, navigating smoothly through content without being interrupted by unnecessary delays. By optimizing page speed, designers can help users maintain their flow and reduce the cognitive strain caused by waiting.
HOW TO RUIN YOUR RELATIONSHIP
Wilson and Kraft (1993) asked couples to analyze their relationships and write lists of why they liked the person they were involved with. Wilson then compared the longevity of the relationship in these couples to the longevity of relationships in a control group that was not asked to logically analyze their relationship. Analyzing the relationships resulted in the relationship ending sooner than the relationships where couples were not asked for an analysis.
Analyzing doesn’t just ruin relationships, but it also seems to ruin your satisfaction with the purchases you make. Wilson (1993) studied individuals buying art posters:
• Group A analyzed why they liked and didn’t like five art posters.
• Group A analyzed why they liked and didn’t like
• Group B did not do any analysis.
Each individual in each group then picked one poster to take home. Two weeks later, researchers contacted them to see how happy they were with their choices. Those in Group B, who didn’t analyze the art they took home, were happier with their choices than those in Group A (who had analyzed their art) Dijksterhuis and van Olden (2005) performed the study again, but they added a few twists. Participants were told the study focused on evaluating art. Everyone in the study was brought in to look at art posters, one at a time, for 15 seconds on a computer screen. Then, after looking at the posters, they were assigned to one of three conditions where they performed more tasks:
• In the Conscious Thought condition, participants looked at each poster one by one on the computer screen and were asked to analyze carefully whether they liked each poster and why or why not. They were given paper and pen to record their analyses. Then all the posters appeared on one screen, and they were asked to pick the one they liked the best.
• In the Unconscious Thought condition, participants engaged in a different task-they worked on anagrams-for the same amount of time. Then they were shown the posters again, all placed on a single screen, and asked which one they liked the best.
• In the Immediate Decision condition, participants were shown a single screen showing all the art posters and asked which poster they liked the most.
At the end of the experiment, the participants could choose a poster to take home. The researchers hypothesized that the Unconscious Thought participants (who worked on anagrams) had made their decisions unconsciously and would be most satisfied with their choices. They were correct. It seems that if we make our choice unconsciously, without conscious processing, then we stick with it over time. If we spend more time and logically analyze why we’re choosing what we’re choosing, we’re less satisfied over time with our choices.
When you strategically use the scarcity principle in webdesign, you’re not only adding value to your content or products, but you’re also tapping into deep-rooted psychological triggers that make visitors want to act fast. Now, before you run off to redesign your entire website with scarcity elements, don’t forget that the trick is to strike a balance. You don’t want to overdo it and turn your site into an endless series of fake urgency signs (looking at you, online stores that have one last item left… for the last three months). Keep it real, keep it genuine, and most importantly, make your visitors feel like they’re stepping into an exclusive club they don’t want to miss. the task at hand, navigating smoothly through content without being interrupted by unnecessary delays. By optimizing page speed, designers can help users maintain their flow and reduce the cognitive strain caused by waiting.
Books and Sources for Your Scarcity Journey:
“Don’t Make Me Think” by Steve Krug – A classic in webdesign, this book explains how to keep your website user-friendly while still using scarcity to drive conversions.
“Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion” by Robert B. Cialdini – This is the bible for understanding psychological principles like scarcity and how they affect decision-making.
“Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products” by Nir Eyal – Learn how scarcity can be used to make your product irresistible. the task at hand, navigating smoothly through content without being interrupted by unnecessary delays. By optimizing page speed, designers can help users maintain their flow and reduce the cognitive strain caused by waiting.
Research Reference:
Cialdini, R. B. (2006). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. Harper Business.
Eyal, N. (2014). Hooked: How to build habit-forming products. Portfolio.
Krug, S. (2000). Don’t make me think: A common sense approach to web usability. New Riders.
Weinschenk, S. (2009). Neuro web design: What makes them click? New Riders.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Psychological Science, 11(6), 143-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00208
Wilson, T. D., & Kraft, D. T. (1993). The influence of analysis on the satisfaction of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 1029-1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.1029
Dijksterhuis, A., & van Olden, L. (2005). The unconscious thought effect in consumer choice. Psychological Science, 16(3), 282-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01530.x
Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, B. (1975). The effect of scarcity on the valuation of an item. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(6), 1038-1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077450
