Application to Retain Repeat Order Shame
Repeat order shame is not eliminated by the discovery that repeat ordering is the statistically likely outcome for most participants in a delivery platform.
SUBJECT: Preliminary Findings: Repeat Order Shame Retention Application (ROSRA)
Status: Under review. No resolution recommended at this time.
Background
The delivery platform displays prior orders under a prominent heading. The heading is designed to reduce friction. It succeeds. The prior order is placed with fewer taps than a new selection would require, and the prior order is a known quantity, which has value in a transaction that is otherwise characterized by uncertainty.
Repeat order shame is the response to noticing that the prior order was placed again, with the platform's assistance, in a context where the stated intention was to try something different.
Preliminary Findings
Finding 1: the variety was available. The menu was opened. The other restaurant's menu was also opened, considered, and closed. The prior restaurant's menu was then opened. The familiar items were visible. The prior order was placed.
Finding 2: the shame is not proportionate to the outcome. The food arrived. It was satisfactory. The factors that made it satisfactory are the same factors that made it satisfactory on each prior occasion, which is, on reflection, precisely why it was ordered again. The shame targets the process rather than the result.
Finding 3: the platform is aware that the prior order heading converts at a measurable rate. This is not disclosed in the interface. The heading is presented as a convenience feature, which it is. Convenience features that also function as behavioral nudges are not required to disclose this in the heading text.
The Contradiction
The application to retain repeat order shame rests on the theory that the shame functions as a corrective. The preliminary findings do not support this theory. Repeat order shame has been present in approximately eleven of the last fourteen delivery transactions. The shame has not altered the outcome of any of those transactions in a measurable way.
The shame is documented. Its function is not established. The application is retained on the grounds that eliminating it would require concluding that the pattern is acceptable, and the applicant is not prepared to make that conclusion at this time.
File pending next order.