Improving trial-to-conversion rates for a spiritual advisor marketplace

Video overview →
My role
Senior Designer
Timeline
3 months
Platform
App + Web
Company
Ingenio
01Problem02Research03Approach04Results05Reflections
01
Problem

We assumed customers were ready to commit

Keen, Ingenio's flagship site, is where people pay by the minute to talk with psychic advisors. Most new customers start with chat, but when the $1 trial ended, most of them left, on every platform.

58%
trial-to-conversion drop-off across web and mobile app
What did I do

Cut cognitive load at the exact moment the trial ends

The Result
+9.5%
mobile app deposits
At a glance
Before
Original full-screen payment modal

High friction at the critical moment

Still building trust, but treated like buyers
A full-screen modal pulled them out of chat
4 dense payment options in 60 seconds
Tap targets too small for thumbs
After
Redesigned bottom sheet payment options

More confident decisions

A bottom sheet keeps the chat in view
3 options with a clear hierarchy
Lowest amount pre-selected
48px tap targets
The button says what you get: “Add 10 more minutes”
02
Research

Paying a psychic online is full of skepticism

barriers

Many users arrive doubting psychic readings are legit.

Asking for money amplifies that doubt.

A 60-second window adds urgency, not confidence.

The research

The trial’s last minute is the most critical point in the funnel

Why chat mattered

Chat feels less committal than a phone call.

Users go at their own pace, no voice required.

Most people discover Keen on their phone.

What we found

Mobile converted about 30% lower than web in every cohort, regardless of advisor or time of day.

The design assumed committed buyers who only needed payment options.

The analysis

Three exit points killed the conversion

Full-screen modal pulling users out of chat

Context disruption

A full-screen modal pulled users out of chat, away from their advisor, at the moment of decision.

Four similar payment options with dense copy

Cognitive overload

4 look-alike options, dense copy and a disclaimer, all under a 60-second clock.

Original payment options with no default selected

Decision paralysis

No default and no clear best value, so the timer often ran out.

The cascade

Each problem fed the next: disruption worsened overload, overload caused paralysis, paralysis ended in timeouts.

03
Approach

Tying to business outcomes

Identify
Credibility at the payment moment
Usability under a 60-second clock
Clarity on what it costs
Which enables
More trials converting to paid
Lower acquisition cost per customer
And drives
More annual revenue from mobile
Higher lifetime value from better first impressions
In sum

More confidence and less cognitive load at payment means more trials convert, which means more revenue and a stronger market position.

The root cause

The payment flow spiked cognitive load at the exact moment trust was forming.

What drove the overload

60-second window

4 dense options

Full-screen takeover

Required disclaimer

design challenge

How might we streamline the UI so customers can choose with confidence before time runs out?

Original Add More Time Now payment screen: four time options, a required disclaimer and an End Chat countdown at 51 seconds
The constraints
Business
Same pricing and payment infrastructure
60 seconds, no more (legal requirement)
A measurable lift within 3 months
Technical
No backend or pricing-logic changes
Existing A/B testing framework
iOS, Android and web built differently
User
Clarity under time pressure
Paying a psychic is high-friction by nature
Thumb-zone ergonomics; 80% prefer chat
Pain point prioritization matrix
Key direction

The pain point matrix pointed to mobile-native patterns (easy, high impact) over backend changes (hard, high impact).

What I changed
Lowest amount pre-selected

Pre-select the lowest amount

Fixes decision paralysis: no default and no clear best value meant the timer often ran out.

Bottom sheet iterations over the chat

Bottom sheet over the chat

Fixes context switching: a full-screen modal pulled users out of chat, away from their advisor.

Streamlined payment options with less copy

Streamlined UI, less copy

Fixes visual clutter: 4 look-alike options, dense copy and a disclaimer under a 60-second clock.

Larger touch target iterations

48px minimum tap targets

Fixes tiny tap targets: the old ones were too small for thumbs.

other key decisions

Cut anything that didn’t help the user make a decision

Clearer type hierarchy so price, time and action read differently

Brand color on the CTA only

A light shadow to lift the sheet over the chat

The prototype
Animated prototype of the new payment flow
04
Validation

Same design, two outcomes

The hypothesis

Users weren’t against paying. They were overwhelmed by the ask at a vulnerable moment.

The test

A

Control

Original payment flow

B

Variant

Optimized for cognitive load

Locked by the test framework

The 1-minute window, the number of options, backend price logic

Platforms

Mobile app + responsive web

Key metric

Deposit conversion rate

Then the scope changed

The VP of Product expanded the test to every platform. I’d designed for that, so the changes scaled with small tweaks.

The results
No impact on web

More noncommittal visitors from lower-intent channels. Commitment, not friction, was the barrier.

+9.5% app deposits

Downloading an app signals intent, especially for a niche product. Friction was the barrier.

The insight

Reducing cognitive load pays off most when users already have intent.

05
Reflections

What I’d carry forward

Strategy first

Framing it as a key business problem (i.e. a mobile-web conversion gap) earned buy-in to pursue this amidst a range of priorities.

Systems over features

Diagnosing the mismatch between where users were (forming trust) and how the system treated them (buyers) revealed the real leverage.

Next case studySaverLifeGrowth →