PDA

View Full Version : Eye Tracking Data



KristineS
10-14-2009, 12:51 PM
A firm in England did some research using eye tracking to figure out how users interact with sites and what design features are important. The article detailing the results of the study (http://www.cxpartners.co.uk/thoughts/what_people_see_before_they_buy_design_guidelines_ for_ecommerce_product_pages_with_eyetracking_data. htm) has some really good information.

I think the item I'm most guilty of transgressing against is the one about information overload. I tend to write a lot about our products. I've learned over time to write out a draft and then go back and cut it in half. That seems to work better.

There wasn't a lot that surprised me in this article, but I did find it useful. I'd be interested to know what the rest of you think.

vangogh
10-14-2009, 03:39 PM
That's a great article. I agree most of the information wasn't surprising, but there are some details within each section that were new to me. For example:


The majority of the participants preferred to see product pictures on the left and description on the right (e.g. M&S). When product details are above the fold, it is very unlikely that the users will scroll down the page.

Granted that's how most product pages are set up, but it's good to know in case you're thinking of changing the order to be different.

This one also makes a lot of sense, but I don't think I've ever thought about it specifically


Participants also preferred product descriptions to be in bullet points as on the Argos page for quick scanning. Putting the description in paragraphs not only clutters the page, it also requires a lot of effort on the shoppers’ part to find details that they want to know: as commented by the participants about Tesco Direct’s page:

Definitely worth reading for anyone who has an ecommerce site. I can guarantee if you follow most of these guidelines more people will buy your products.

KristineS
10-14-2009, 05:23 PM
Definitely worth reading for anyone who has an ecommerce site. I can guarantee if you follow most of these guidelines more people will buy your products.

That was part of the reason I wanted to share a link to the article here. There are a lot of tips in that article that could be useful, particularly to people who are just starting out.

Spider
10-14-2009, 06:28 PM
Great article! Thanks for posting.

My particular "take home" was that 2-column worked better than 3-column. The exampled shown were

3-column = wide center column, 2 narrow columns

2-column = left narrow column, right wide column

Most of the sales pages that I see are either very long (a 'no-no, according to this article) and single column, or they are 3-column. Seems the 2-column format, which is supposed to best, isn't very popular.

Any comments on that?

vangogh
10-15-2009, 02:21 AM
Frederick that might be a site specific thing. I've seen other studies where the 3 column layout outperformed the 2 columns. Aesthetically I prefer 2 columns since it allows the design more room to breathe, but there are cases where more columns turned out to be the better option.

The only way to really know is to test.

It really comes down to the specific site and the specific audience for that site. Take those long single page sales letter pages. I see them and all I think is spam, but there is something to them. It's often a single page highly focused on selling one thing. Those pages are long because they try to counter every possible objection someone might have before buying.

Most of us will never read the whole sales page. We probably scroll to the bottom to see the price and then leave. To the person who's on the fence all that copy helps get them to click the button and actually buy.

This study was specifically about product pages on ecommerce sites. The conclusions it draws may or may not be the same for other types of sites and even other pages on ecommerce sites.

Spider
10-15-2009, 09:13 AM
Interesting. I like the 3-column layout because I find it more focused. The wide 'content' column on a 2-column page is not as easy to read as the narrower center column of a 3-column layout. (Rather like a newspaper being easier/quicker to read than a book.)

Of course, this is just personal preference, but how does the general public view them, I wonder? I think I will test it on my main site's home page.

Just as a sidenote - my main site is 3-column throughout and not doing too bad on SERP positioning and visitors, while the site that is struggling is generally 2-column. Probably coincidence.

Patrysha
10-15-2009, 09:19 AM
It could be coincidence or it could be that appeals to your target market. Just because the majority prefer one thing doesn't mean that is going to hold out among all groups, right?

vangogh
10-15-2009, 12:04 PM
The wide 'content' column on a 2-column page is not as easy to read as the narrower center column of a 3-column layout.

This is actually a function of how long each line is. Humans feel comfortable reading lines that are between 45 - 75 characters, with an idea line length being around 65 characters. If the width of the content area increases then the size of the font should also increase to match the character limits. Unfortunately most people don't do this so you end up with small fonts in a wide content area.


Rather like a newspaper being easier/quicker to read than a book.

That might be more a function of the type of content each contains. With a book you want to read every word. With a newspaper you're more likely to scan to get the most pertinent information. I think both are good at falling into the character limits for line length. It's more the web where that guideline falls by the wayside.