In the last two articles, we discussed how flat design has become the visual language of the modern web because it is clean, efficient and scalable. Flat design is ideal for responsive systems and minimalist aesthetics. But how intuitive and learnable are flat visuals?

This article looks at how the pursuit of simplicity with flat design can sometimes make interfaces harder to use, especially for people new to technology, low-literacy users or people operating under stress.

The Illusion of Clarity and Flat Design

Flat design removes shadows, textures and real-world metaphors in favour of simple shapes and solid colours. At its best, flat design creates crisp, modern interfaces that get out of the user’s way. But it also strips away visual cues that used to teach users how to navigate digital systems.

With skeuomorphism, the design approach that mimics real-world objects, metaphors were doing a lot of the heavy lifting. A trash icon looked like a metal bin. A notebook app looked like lined paper pages. This affords a high degree of intuitive interpretation, albeit culturally-bound, where the interface explained itself through familiarity.

Flat design removed a lot of those bridges of intuition. Now, you are expected to recognise a minimal line drawing or a coloured shape and understand what it means and what it is for, where there is no metaphor and no hint.

Who Is It Intuitive For?

One of the biggest myths in modern User Interface design is that flat interfaces are universally “intuitive”. But is this actually the case?

Designers and developers, who work with digital systems every day, are steeped in established patterns. A thin rectangle with a label looks like a button, or a triangle means ‘play’ or three stacked lines mean ‘menu’.

These are not universally intuitive. They are visuals that have to be learnt.

Imagine the following scenarios:

·       A 70-year-old user trying online banking for the first time.

·       A teenager navigating an e-learning platform under exam stress.

·       A patient in a clinical study navigating an electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment for the first time.

·       A patient using a healthcare app after surgery.

For these users and context, minimal icons and unlabelled buttons are not obvious. They are vague. Flat design assumes a level of digital fluency that many people, even today, may not possess.

The Loss of Affordance

Affordance refers to how clearly a design element suggests what it does. As we have outlined in previous articles, skeuomorphic design excelled at this. Then flat design often removes all of that. A button might just be blue text on a white background. A link might look identical to a heading or an input field may be indistinguishable from regular content.

When affordances have been largely removed, users have to resort to guesswork: can I click this? What happens if I tap that? And when feedback is minimal, with no hover state, animation or pressed effect, users cannot even tell if their action worked.

Think about it: most feedback is not required to complete a task: think about the ‘click’ of putting toast into a toaster or the microwave start ‘beep’ doesn’t do anything in relation to the execution of a task. but it does reassure the user that they have done the right thing and are on the right track. We need feedback.

Learning Through Visual Clues

For a visual to be truly intuitive, it must teach as you go. Interfaces that are learnable guide the user through new tasks, introducing complexity gradually and offering clear visual signals at each step.

Flat design, in its strictest form, does not always provide that scaffolding. It treats all elements with visual equality. This often means removing hierarchy, de-emphasising interaction and minimising feedback. This makes it hard to tell what matters, what you can click on or what has changed.

This is fine for tools that expert users are going to use, where users are deeply familiar with the interface. But in learning communities, like onboarding flows, platforms for children, first-time users, older people or people under stress or in a crisis, then it becomes a problem.

Learning happens through visual language. This is often missing in flat design.

Context Is Key

The effectiveness of flat design depends heavily on context. In highly structured systems where users repeat the same tasks, such as email apps, dashboards or code editors, flat design works well. This is because it minimised friction and puts the focus on content and function.

However, in more emotionally or cognitively demanding environments, flat design can fail quietly. The consequences can be serious.

Consider the following scenarios:

·       A user does not notice a warning because the icon looks decorative and too abstract to be interpreted as a warning.

·       A patient does not click a “Call for help” button because it blends into the interface.

·       A parent cannot find where to submit a school form because there is no button hierarchy.

In these moments, the cost of minimalism is misunderstanding. This is where flat design does not provide enough support. It can be exclusionary.

The Role of Emotion in Learning

The role that emotion plays in learning cannot be overemphasised. Good design helps users perform tasks, but it also makes them feel safe while doing so. Skeuomorphic interfaces, while sometimes clunky, often carried warmth and personality. A textured notebook in a journaling app feels familiar. A glowing button in a health app feels reassuring.

In contrast, flat design sometimes removes this emotion and comfort. And when people are anxious, tired or under pressure, such as in an emergency situation, the emotional tone of the app matters.

Learning requires emotional safety. If an interface feels hostile, unhelpful or indifferent, users disengage.

Can we have both Empathy and Minimalism?

Flat design is not going away and nor should it. It is essential for modern interfaces, but, on its own, it is not enough. If we want designs that are truly intuitive, especially for vulnerable users, there needs to be a reintroduction of some of what flat design removed:

·       Clear affordances, such as shadows, outlines and hover states.

·       Icon labels for discoverability

·       Visual hierarchy to guide attention

·       Emotional tone through colour, motion and microinteractions

·       Instructional cues for onboarding and learning.

Intuition is built and not assumed

Flat design needs to grow up and become more empathetic. The core mistake that flat design makes is cognitive, rather than visual. It assumes that users already know what to do. But intuitive design comes by thoughtful design that teaches, guides and reassures. Flat design assumes too much. Skeuomorphic design brought comfort, empathy and meaning, while flat design brought clarity and minimalism.

Can we have all of these? Is there a way of bridging the neat design of flat with the familiarity of skeuomorphic? This is the topic of the next article.

 Thank you for reading,

Mark Gibson

Sunderland, United Kingdom, June 2025