47 replies to this topic

[kajax101]

I personally hate using 'click here' on websites and avoid it like the plague. I think the rational argument for NOT using 'click here' is a solid one, it is redundant, linking a relevant action verb is much more effective, but here is my question.

Has the over-use of 'click here' turned it into one of those website standards such as 'shopping cart' that everyone instinctually recognizes? If so, does this make 'click here' an element that boosts website usability?

[web_wanderer]

I think all the old reasons against the use of "click here" are still valid: the phrase is too pushy and looks stupid on print.

Now, however there's one more source to back up your arguments - W3C accessibility guidelines:
http://www.w3.org/TR...ML-TECHS/#links

As accessibility becomes increasingly popular aspect of online presence, clients typically prefer not to create additional obstacles on the way and give up with the belief that their web site visitors are only smart enough to follow 'click here' links.

[Thox]

In accessability terms I think "click the image below" is worse, but "click here" is bad enough. I try to avoid it.

[Adrian]

Click here is bad and nasty
Use descriptive text for the link, much better. Mainly for the accessibility points made above.

[trevHCS]

I'd have thought "click here to do X" was more of a guide to the user that a pushy statement. It tells even the newest user what to do when perhaps they wouldn't see a link as being a gateway to their goal.

I can understand it not being used everywhere of course for both usability and SEO purposes, but is it really so bad that it needs to be assigned to the great deep hole where we dropped animated e-mail gif's 5 years ago?

Trev

[Ransak]

I am not totally in disagrement with you all on the 'click here'. I'm not entirely fond of it. But the WC3 article is not exactlly conclusive proof that putting 'click here' is bad. It is mearly an opinion piece.

The argument about 'click here' being device dependant is valid, yet very weak when debating Business owners and marketing staff. They counter with 'ok we can make it more useable for another 1% of people who might use different media, but what if we lose 2% of others who do not click the right link? No science to back up that claim but it is real in their minds.

I think with the user who is not internet savvy and does not work directly on the web, click here has become a standard. It is always asked for when I work directly with business owners and marketing staff.

On the other hand, agencies and designers always distain it. Yet, we forget that for many sites, the people we are targeting are more like the business owner and less like the designer. These are the same types who type URL's into google to surf the web.

Frank V.

[cre8pc]

All the guidelines I've seen from the usability oriented books and articles is it should be avoided when possible.

But, I don't have a bird when I see a thumbnail image and tiny font msg that says "Click to enlarge" or a tiny arrow and word "enlarge" that when pushed, activate the blow up. Most people know to do this, but I've found, in testing sites, that many sites actually do not have this option. This means the visitor clicks on the image, thinking it will enlarge, but nothing happens. That's frustrating.

The better rule of thumb is to refine the amount of words to cut down on redundancies (hard to do!) and make all labels more descriptive and accurate. Underlining text is a dead giveaway that the word(s) can be clicked. The trend to remove underlines from words removes the obvious, and forces another way to invite an action from the visitor.

For SEO and kinder accessibility, hyperlinking words (anchor text) is the logical choice

[kajax101]

we forget that for many sites, the people we are targeting are more like the business owner and less like the designer

I think this is a very interesting point, I sometimes get the feeling that the proponents of web usability are streets ahead of regular internet users, and the simple fact is that most people aren't that internet savvy, even a lot IT technicians who are wizards in networking, programming etc, won't really notice whether you have a 'click here to view our annual report' or 'view our annual report' . So the average users that I know (practically everyone I know who uses the net) doesn't really spot such differences and won't consider a site unprofessional for using 'click here' instead of a contextual link.

[Ruud]

The whole thing has never come close to bother me in the least.

I do remember contemplating illegal acts consisting of inflincting serious bodliy harm when I sat behind my Pentium 166 (32 MB RAM) and my 1GB drive would churn and churn and churn while because a link not simply opened in its own window but somehow was considered to be important enough to validate its complete own browser instance. Now that is annoying.

I would go for one or the other though. Some sites have me hover over their links so I can see where they go as they would do "click here to view our annual report" - making you click & inspect two links.

On the "average users we know" note - the users I know need a clearly hyperlinked 'click here'. Sometimes I think that apart from all the efforts for chield friendly Internet places we should have elderly and non-internet savt places as well...

Ruud

[Respree]

I think the implied action of a clearly designated text link is to click it. In my view, that's the nature of a text link. What else can the user but to click it (if that's where they want to go)?

Sometimes links are 'not' so obvious. Let's take thumbnail images for example. It could be linked or maybe it's not. A 'click to enlarge" link, in this case, would be recommended, as it assists the user in letting them know the image 'is' a link.

[sanity]

I sometimes get the feeling that the proponents of web usability are streets ahead of regular internet users, and the simple fact is that most people aren't that internet savvy,

Good point. I have no problem using a click here if it works in the copy and reads well. Heck if it helps a user find what they're looking for I'm all for it. With the number of sites where link colours are not obvious or words are underlined as well as links sometimes a simple click here can help avoid confusion.

[Adrian]

I was going to raise Sophie's point earlier, but was busy and so she beat me too it

How many times have you had to play hunt the link because underlining is removed or it's styled to look just like plain text until hovered over or something. Clearly in those cases, a 'Click here' instruction helps.

I'd tend to argue that it'd be better to make links more easy to see and so keep the context, than to use click here to help unhide otherwise difficult to find links.

[sanity]

Ya gotta be quick Adrian.

I'd tend to argue that it'd be better to make links more easy to see and so keep the context, than to use click here to help unhide otherwise difficult to find links.

Agreed. But then again there are definitely users out there that need a click here that stands out like... well you know what I mean. My mum is one of them - I don't know how she manages to get around the net I really don't. Like a lot of this stuff who your audience are will guide a lot of these decisions.

[mugshot]

I have no problems with CLICK HERE, especially when we websites need to cater to a population who are not as internet savvy as us in these forums. As a matter of fact, even I have to look for links sometimes

One method that I've found useful is to provide a "dead end" to your readers. This concept involves having a page of content with whatever in-text links you desire. Additionally, at the very end of the paragraph, if there is a certain call to action that you require them to do, place it in bold there.

Name it whatever you want because by that time, the reader is already involved in your article, content, whatever that he or she has no choice but compelled to click there

Some good links that I've used in the past are
Get More Information
Read More About "TOPIC"
Ready to Order?

[Ransak]

How many times have you had to play hunt the link because underlining is removed or it's styled to look just like plain text until hovered over or something. Clearly in those cases, a 'Click here' instruction helps.

I totally agree. I usually only remove the underlining sparingly and never within a body of text.

Frank V.

[Respree]

Check your PM, Frank!

[sanity]

RALMAO

[Respree]

Looks like this...

[sanity]

Except I would imagine it says you have 1 new message.

[Respree]

That's the only screen cap I could take. But of course, I 'always' check my messages. The same cannot be said with all members. Ehem. <cough><cough>