Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

UsabilityLab

@usabilitylab

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

4,914subscribers

-14 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001301291359
TypeChannel
Username@usabilitylab
CreatedBetween 1 March 2018 and 30 June 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/usabilitylab

Growth

4,9144,9284,9216 August 2026 — 4,928 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,928 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,926 subscribers9 August 2026 — 4,917 subscribers12 August 2026 — 4,914 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
5 measurements spanning 7 days, net -14. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 4,912–4,930 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 19:054,914-3
9 Aug 2026, 21:504,917-9
6 Aug 2026, 23:564,926-2
6 Aug 2026, 06:014,928no change
6 Aug 2026, 05:534,928first reading

Engagement

22 posts held, back to 21 May 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
13.8%
avg views ÷ 4,914 subscribers
Avg views / post
677
11 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.59%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
11
of 22 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held22 (21 May 202611 August 2026)
Views total7,448
Reactions total193
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 05:06 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
7m 04s
Average length
1m 01s

Measured directly from 7 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

438 reactions across 21 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 29.9% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥13129.9%
8519.4%
❤‍🔥6715.3%
👍4410.0%
🤩398.90%
🎉327.31%
😁225.02%
💯61.37%
🥰51.14%
🤯30.685%
👏20.457%
🤪20.457%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 22 of the 22 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 475reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 22 most recent posts we hold, published 21 May 2026 to 11 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

11 Aug 2026, 15:34 UTC231 views10 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Хороший модератор — это про баланс вопросов и молчания. Стоит перегнуть в любую сторону, и интервью начинает работать против тебя. Собрали четыре типа модераторов, в которых можно узнать себя — хотя бы в один тяжёлый день. Листай карусель и признавайся, кто ты 🙂 Хорошая новость: модерирование — это навык. Свои перекосы можно замечать и выправлять: держать линию интервью и при этом слышать человека. Как раз этому у

🔥5👍3❤‍🔥1🥰1

6 Aug 2026, 15:33 UTC529 views19 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

UX-квиз! Вы проводите интервью — собеседник уверенно отвечает на вопрос. Но можно ли верить этому ответу? В ролике — задачка: два вопроса модератора на выбор, и разбор, что на самом деле стоит за каждым из них. А ещё — известный эксперимент, после которого к прямому вопросу «почему» начинаешь относиться осторожнее. А какой вопрос вы бы задали на месте модератора? Пишите в комментариях. Больше узнать о практиках м

9🔥6🤩3❤‍🔥1

5 Aug 2026, 13:05 UTC542 views22 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Новый ролик из цикла «Истории UX» — про эффект IKEA, поведенческую экономику и один из самых известных когнитивных эффектов, который давно вышел за пределы мебельных магазинов. Эффект IKEA — один из базовых принципов вовлечения в UX. В ролике показываем, как он работает на практике и почему продукты, в создание которых пользователь вложился сам, становятся для него ценнее. https://youtube.com/shorts/EjcU3sqTQdI

🔥11🤩5❤‍🔥4🎉2

4 Aug 2026, 15:33 UTC642 views25 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

🎉Мы запустили UX-Атлас, каталог скриншотов интерфейсных решений по отраслям! В ленте сверху свежие обновления, рядом фильтры по приложению, теме и сфере. У каждого приложения свой таймлайн, по нему видно, как оно менялось от версии к версии. Сценарий открывается целиком, экран за экраном. Что внутри уже сейчас: • 34 приложения, практически 5000 скриншотов • 1600+ решений в банковских приложениях • 124 сценария в де

🔥117🎉3❤‍🔥2🤩2

3 Aug 2026, 15:34 UTC560 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Одно и то же дизайн-решение может одновременно поднимать вовлечённость и ухудшать жизнь пользователя. Второе просто не попадает в метрики, поэтому остаётся невидимым. В новой статье разбираем механизм на примере четырёх доменов: сон, стресс, самооценка, общение. Показываем, какие привычные UX-решения уже подталкивают человека в каждом из них. В 2026 тема впервые получила юридическую рамку сразу с двух сторон: 🇪🇺 Е

🔥6❤‍🔥3🥰3

31 Jul 2026, 08:49 UTC645 views21 reactionsread 12 August 2026

А вы знали, что Хедвиг фон Ресторфф и Блюма Зейгарник - однокурсницы? И обе учились у Курта Левина. Мы опубликовали второй ролик из цикла Истории UX, посвященный гештальт-психологии (не терапии, а научного направления), которая оказала огромное влияние на психологию восприятия и не только. https://youtube.com/shorts/baq_gzNC7RE

🔥84❤‍🔥4🤩4🤯1

30 Jul 2026, 12:14 UTC704 views9 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Квартальный UX-мониторинг банков: Q2 2026 Апрель — июнь 2026 · 30 банков · 127 релизов Первый квартальный срез 2026 года дал однозначный ответ: дисциплина исполнения важнее инновации. Лидеры побеждали не новыми функциями, а стабильностью — именно она отделяла сильных игроков от тех, кто гнался за возможностями, не удержав основу. Второй квартальный срез — апрель–июнь 2026 — показывает, что ситуация обострилась. Рын

🔥54

22 Jul 2026, 08:59 UTC920 views19 reactionsread 12 August 2026

75% пациентов говорят: портал удобный. Но только 35% нашли в нём то, за чем пришли. Удобно - не значит полезно! Анна Исламова провела исследование, результаты которого разрывают связь между юзабилити и полезностью в медицинских интерфейсах. Почему это важно: - 89% медицинских ошибок связаны с дизайном интерфейса. - 70% пользователей медицинских приложений уходят за первые 100 дней. - А числовые результаты анализов

🔥10🤩43❤‍🔥2

21 Jul 2026, 09:59 UTC883 views19 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Опубликовали очередной ролик из серии “История UX” https://youtube.com/shorts/Bm9-FSf8GMA?si=ewyGIhVO05G8rpRq Закон изоляции - эффект Хедвиг фон Ресторфф

7🔥7❤‍🔥5

20 Jul 2026, 17:12 UTC798 views26 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Респондент молчит. До конца сессии 10 минут. Три гипотезы не закрыты. Что скажете? — «Вы имеете в виду, что было неудобно?» — «Расскажите на конкретном примере» Один из этих вариантов — ошибка, у которой есть имя. Канеман и Тверски назвали её фреймингом: форма вопроса меняет ответ, даже если суть та же. Проверьте себя — ответ в ролике ↑ Больше о когнитивных искажениях в модерации — в наших курсах: https://usabili

👍15🔥65

16 Jul 2026, 11:57 UTC994 views11 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Опубликовали исследование демографии и психографии клиентов Private Banking Экономика доверия: клиентский опыт, психология и сегментация в Private Banking Комплексное исследование рынка Private Banking: боли клиентов, конкурентный ландшафт, психология богатства, психографическая сегментация (5 персон). 50+ источников. Ключевые числа В 2024 году NPS клиентов российского Private Banking упал на 19 п.п. — с 62% до 4

4🔥3🤩3❤‍🔥1

8 Jul 2026, 12:16 UTC958 views32 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

59% карточных транзакций — женские. А интерфейс проектирует мужчина. Как это влияет на ваш онлайн-бизнес? У каждого e-commerce есть отчёт по конверсиям в разрезе пола. И почти у всех в нём одна картина: женщин на сайте больше, чем среди тех, кто оплачивает заказ. Стандартный вывод — «женщины просто смотрят». Двадцать лет UX-исследований дали нам другую версию. Мы обнаружили её случайно — на проекте, где впервые пос

🔥177💯6🤯2

Showing the 12 most recent of 22 posts we hold for @usabilitylab. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 264,671 of 1,160,990entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Republished by

Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.

Republishes

Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 3 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“UsabilityLab” (@usabilitylab), 4,914 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/usabilitylab.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.