For all the improvements in UIs to ATMs it's not clear to me they are addressing the core issue, which is the chain of responsibility and accountability that builds trust.
I haven't deposited anything at an ATM since I read the fine print on my ATM "transaction record.' That fine print explicitly stated that the piece of paper spit out by the machine was in fact a transaction record and not a receipt. That is, the bank didn't acknowledge having received anything from me. The fine print further pointed out that by not having a receipt I was bearing responsibility. I feel that under these circumstances, the rational thing to do is to do deposits in person. I don't care what BoA prints on that piece of paper - until they acknowledge it's a receipt and they are responsible I'm not using it and I'll continue to advise people not to use it. I agree that most people don't reason this way and I'm pretty sure 99.99% of people have never read the fine print on that piece of paper. But everyone has a story, or knows someone who has a story, or saw a story on their local news. The atmosphere created is one where trust is not well founded so it's hardly surprising when it's absent. I think credit card companies have gone to great lengths (and factored in larger losses due to fraud) in order to create an atmosphere in which people are more willing to trust their credit card companies than their banks. it's a great lesson in user psychology, if nothing else. Best, --Alan ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
