A fast first layer of UX diagnosis,
before you invest in a full research engagement.
Every recommendation backed by cognitive psychology, behavioral science, and validated UX research from leading institutions worldwide.
Bigger & closer targets are easier to click. Reduces user friction.
Fitts, 1954More choices = longer decisions. Simplify options to speed action.
Hick, 1952Users expect your site to work like others. Follow conventions.
Nielsen, 2000Working memory holds only a few chunks at a time. Group related information into small sets.
Miller, 1956Beautiful designs are perceived as more usable. First impressions matter.
Kurosu & Kashimura, 1995Users group elements by proximity, similarity, and continuity.
Wertheimer, 1923Users scan pages in F-shape. Place key content on the left.
Nielsen, 2006Size, color, and contrast guide the eye. Control attention flow.
Lidwell et al., 2003Overloaded users make errors. Reduce mental effort required.
Sweller, 1988Users remember first and last items best. Place CTAs strategically.
Murdock, 1962Different items stand out and are remembered. Use contrast wisely.
von Restorff, 1933Incomplete tasks are remembered better. Use progress indicators.
Zeigarnik, 1927Bigger & closer targets are easier to click. Reduces user friction.
Fitts, 1954More choices = longer decisions. Simplify options to speed action.
Hick, 1952Users expect your site to work like others. Follow conventions.
Nielsen, 2000Working memory holds only a few chunks at a time. Group related information into small sets.
Miller, 1956Beautiful designs are perceived as more usable. First impressions matter.
Kurosu & Kashimura, 1995Users group elements by proximity, similarity, and continuity.
Wertheimer, 1923Users scan pages in F-shape. Place key content on the left.
Nielsen, 2006Size, color, and contrast guide the eye. Control attention flow.
Lidwell et al., 2003Overloaded users make errors. Reduce mental effort required.
Sweller, 1988Users remember first and last items best. Place CTAs strategically.
Murdock, 1962Different items stand out and are remembered. Use contrast wisely.
von Restorff, 1933Incomplete tasks are remembered better. Use progress indicators.
Zeigarnik, 1927From cognitive psychology to accessibility standards, every criterion names its evidence basis, the symptoms it detects, and an actionable fix.
We screenshot your page on desktop and mobile, exactly what real users experience in their first 3-5 seconds.
Each element is checked against the criteria it triggers, drawn from a framework of 167 derived from cognitive psychology: touch targets, visual hierarchy, cognitive load, attention flow, and accessibility standards.
Findings are ranked by estimated conversion impact, not just severity. Every recommendation traces back to published research, with specific fixes, not vague suggestions.
Works with any website platform: we analyze what users see, not your tech stack
Interface Audit is not a replacement for research. It is a faster starting point. When context matters, the Expert Review adds the human layer.
The platform reveals and sizes what's wrong. Fixing it for good is work we do together.
See the 167 Audit CriteriaThe top issues on one page, desktop view, in about 30 seconds.
Every issue on your site, scored and prioritized.
The full report unlocks from your scan results, so it covers the exact page you scanned.
View sample reportAn expert reads your report with you and shows you what actually matters.
The $399 is credited toward your retainer if you continue.
Book Expert ReviewContinuous monthly monitoring is coming soon.
Need ongoing work? Senior UX direction on retainer, from $2,000/mo. Not a junior team, not an agency markup. We scope it on your Expert Review call.
Need something tailored to your team? Contact us
Our UX audit analyzes your website against 167 research-backed Audit Criteria, including Fitts's Law, Hick's Law, Jakob's Law, Gestalt principles, and cognitive load theory. Each finding names the criterion it violates and explains exactly how to fix it, so you can inspect the reasoning behind every recommendation.
Lighthouse and PageSpeed measure technical and web-platform signals. Interface Audit evaluates interface-level usability, design, accessibility, and interaction criteria: visual hierarchy, attention patterns, decision fatigue, and conversion friction. We identify the interface factors most likely to create friction, even when your site is technically fast.
Traditional UX agencies give you consultant opinions that vary by designer. Interface Audit works from 167 research-backed Audit Criteria. Every recommendation traces back to published research and accessibility standards, not to personal preference.
The free audit opens your first finding instantly, no email required, on the desktop view of your page. Enter your email to unlock half of your findings for free, at least three. The Full Report ($99) unlocks the complete analysis: every issue scored against the criteria it triggers from the 167-criteria framework, desktop + mobile comparison, a prioritized action plan, and downloadable PDF.
The Full Report is delivered in minutes, so it is not covered by a change-of-mind refund. If it fails to generate, comes back empty, or analyses a page other than the one you bought, we re-run it or refund you in full. The Expert Review is refundable in full until report production starts, since the Full Report it includes is produced ahead of the session.
Every UX recommendation traces to published research. Other tools say 'best practices' without proof. Our UX analysis is grounded in published cognitive-science research, not pattern-matching from training data. Every finding traces back to published research you can verify.
Full Report ($99): a complete automated diagnosis. Expert Review ($399): a live session where I interpret the findings for your business and tell you what to fix first. Retainer: ongoing senior direction to actually fix it. The Expert Review fee is credited toward the retainer.
Yes. The $399 is credited toward your retainer if you continue.
It does not replace usability testing, analytics, user interviews or strategic UX research. Findings describe observable interface conditions and likely friction, not proven user behavior or causal business impact, and the accessibility checks are automated: they find what a tool can detect and are not a WCAG conformance evaluation. Context and judgment are what the Expert Review adds.