2 clarified wording
source | link

I suppose it depends on one major variable: does the user get into an accident?

Since the experience only affects those that don't wear seatbelts, we have to assume these are people that don't like to wear seatbelts.

So is the better user experience the one where they getare forced to do whatsomething they don't want to do (Not wherewear the seatbeldseatbelt) or is it a better UXuser experience to allow them to do what they want (not make the warning so annoying so they can keep the seatbelt off).?

Ultimately, the answer to that is whether or not they get into a serious accident.

Usually the better experience is to guide them so that they don't run into situations where they are forced to do something they don't want to do. However, the consequences aren't usually as severe. But context is everything. Take medical equipment, for instance. This likely needs to have a very obnoxious alarm. That's sacrificing the user experience for the doctor/nurse in exchange for saving a person's life. When it comes to alarm systems, I imagine UX won't always be the primary objective.

I suppose it depends on one major variable: does the user get into an accident?

Since the experience only affects those that don't wear seatbelts, we have to assume these are people that don't like to wear seatbelts.

So is the better user experience the one where they get to do what they want (Not where the seatbeld) or is it better UX to allow them to do what they want (not make the warning so annoying so they can keep the seatbelt off).

Ultimately, the answer to that is whether or not they get into a serious accident.

I suppose it depends on one major variable: does the user get into an accident?

Since the experience only affects those that don't wear seatbelts, we have to assume these are people that don't like to wear seatbelts.

So is the better user experience the one where they are forced to do something they don't want to do (wear the seatbelt) or is it a better user experience to allow them to do what they want (not make the warning so annoying so they can keep the seatbelt off)?

Ultimately, the answer to that is whether or not they get into a serious accident.

Usually the better experience is to guide them so that they don't run into situations where they are forced to do something they don't want to do. However, the consequences aren't usually as severe. But context is everything. Take medical equipment, for instance. This likely needs to have a very obnoxious alarm. That's sacrificing the user experience for the doctor/nurse in exchange for saving a person's life. When it comes to alarm systems, I imagine UX won't always be the primary objective.

1
source | link

I suppose it depends on one major variable: does the user get into an accident?

Since the experience only affects those that don't wear seatbelts, we have to assume these are people that don't like to wear seatbelts.

So is the better user experience the one where they get to do what they want (Not where the seatbeld) or is it better UX to allow them to do what they want (not make the warning so annoying so they can keep the seatbelt off).

Ultimately, the answer to that is whether or not they get into a serious accident.