No.

We shouldn’t be sorry. We shouldn’t make excuses. We should use a sympathetic tone to quickly get the user back on track – to provide them with the information they need to move on.

I was part of a large voice and tone study where we actually tested “We’re sorry” – I hate to admit it, but most users appreciated those two little words. I stand by the fact we were in a lab and it was way out of context.

In certain circumstances, it works. Overall, should it be considered part of content strategy for error messages, trust & safety content, and restricted access to areas of the site (e.g.,
“we’re sorry, you need to upgrade blah blah blah”)? No. It shouldn’t.

Sorry.

Which is better?

“We’re sorry. You need to fill in a valid user name to continue. .”

or:

“Oops! Please enter a valid user name. Pick one 5-10 characters long.”

The apology in the first example doesn’t really make sense. It’s basically saying “We’re sorry you’re stupid.”

The second example is just a quick reminder to the user to follow the instructions. It tells them what they did wrong, but with a smile. The user can immediately fix their error and move on.

That said, I don’t think an apology would hurt the situation. The most important thing to remember when writing error messages is to include instructions for how the user can right their wrong, with or without an apology. “Sorry” by itself won’t fix it.

Regarding design and fault: Totally agree with you and Norman. Good design means preventing errors from happening. But is your stance, then, that all error messages should include an apology? Do we assume all errors are ultimately our fault?

Or since you say we don’t want to apologize for user stupidity, do we determine which errors are design flaws and which ones are stupidity and construct error messages appropriately? How would that be done?

I much prefer the content work with the intent of the design and flow. It is the designers’ intent that the flow works (we hope!), and therefore, an appropriate error message would not include an apology. If it is found the flow does not work, the flow should be fixed – and not by adding an apology on an error message (oooh… content expected to shore up bad IA is a big, fat pet peeve of mine… I feel another post coming).

I have to throw out a counterargument though. In “The Design of Everyday Things” (http://tinyurl.com/cktojc), Don Norman argues that any design that leads the user to make a mistake is the designer’s fault.

Think of most digital camera batteries these days, for example. There are four possible angles to insert a battery into a camera, but it’s usually designed so that it doesn’t fit unless you put it in the right way. It’s designed to prevent errors from happening. Now, granted, we probably don’t want to apologize for user stupidity, but I guess our goal should be to design to prevent error, and maybe even own up to it if a user behave stupidly…?