Exercise 2: Five Different Button Styles for One Functional Role — Possible Solution
====================================================================

This is missing repetition - the CRAP/CARP principle of repeating
visual choices consistently across a design, so that elements playing
the same functional role also look the same. Five different styles for
what is functionally the same "primary action" button means the same
underlying concept (this is the main thing to do on this screen) is
being represented by five visually unrelated designs instead of one
consistent one.

The real consequence for the user is that they can no longer rely on
a learned visual pattern to recognize the primary action at a glance.
Every time they land on a new screen, they have to re-figure out which
element is the important one, rather than instantly recognizing it the
way they would if every primary button shared the same recognizable
style - the exact benefit repetition is supposed to provide, and the
exact cost of skipping it.

ANSWER: This is missing repetition - the same functional role (the
primary action button) should look the same everywhere it appears, but
here it doesn't. The real consequence is that users can't build a
reliable, learned visual pattern for "this is the important button,"
so they have to re-evaluate each screen individually instead of
recognizing the primary action instantly.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This correctly identifies repetition as the missing CRAP/CARP
principle and explains the real cost to the user - losing the ability
to rely on a consistent, learned visual pattern - rather than simply
saying the design looks inconsistent.