Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

What Makes You Love A Web Site?

web design ux usability marketing neuroscience

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13454 posts

Posted 24 June 2014 - 01:23 PM

Of all the studies and research done on user experience design for websites and applications,the one thing we can count on are the complaints.

 

Let's turn this around.

 

I love product details that show me the details, such as craftsmanship, or material.

 

I love sites that make it easy for me to read or scan.

 

I love sites that make me feel good while I'm there.

 

What do you love?



#2 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5361 posts

Posted 24 June 2014 - 02:21 PM

My first requirement is content.  It has to be written in a style that is easy-to-read and when I read it my BS meter better not be going off.

 

After that, I like articles that have....

 

**  frequent subheadings so I can scan and stop to think before progressing

 

** short paragraphs that allow me to take a breath between subjects when reading

 

** high quality original photos, graphs, data, etc.

 

** clean, uncluttered, unbusy design.  I have vision problems and don't want anything competing with the content

 

** simple font, arial or similar, maybe times, black on white or very close to that

 

** narrow columns for easy reading

 

** ads don't bother me (I like to see what ads are running) unless then intrude on the content or have autoplay video or audio.

 

** I like links to highly related stories on the same site.. If you have more I probably want to read it.

 

** I like links to reference content on other sites.  Nothing better than a great article that links out to the nitty gritty.

 

** I don't mind videos but would rather read because written content is usually more detailed and carefully worded.  Videos are OK on a gossip site but on a technical site you need carefully worded details and video when necessary

 

** I open most of the things that I read into tabs so your videos should be manual start.


Edited by EGOL, 24 June 2014 - 02:31 PM.


#3 test-ok

test-ok

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 357 posts

Posted 24 June 2014 - 08:20 PM

I love sites that offer the information I'm looking for and easy to find



#4 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2487 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 03:03 AM

I have not found an inspiring website in years.



#5 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1526 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 09:50 AM

I love sites that offer the information I'm looking for and easy to find

@ test-ok took the words right out of my mouth.   :infinite-banana:  :infinite-banana:  :infinite-banana:



#6 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13454 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 12:53 PM

I love sites that offer the information I'm looking for and easy to find

 

About how long do you all allow yourself to stay on a page to get this information?

 

How do you know it has what you are looking for?



#7 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1526 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 02:37 PM

About how long do you all allow yourself to stay on a page to get this information?

 

How do you know it has what you are looking for?

About how long???   About as long as it takes to determine if the information is good or not.  That time could vary.  I know that is a subjective response..but it is what it is.

 

How do I know?    Also a subjective response.   

 

That 2nd question leads me to a google algo point from about 2 years ago that really burns my butt.    I think about 2 years ago MC announced an algo impact that received little commentary or response.  He referenced that certain websites were deemed authoritative would sit higher in serps.

 

...so about 2 years ago some "cr@ppy @ssed" pages from some big corporate website with structures that look like   cityA.coroporateURL dot com, cityB.corporateURL dot com started showing up for an incredible variety of local search terms for a huge variety of services and businesses.  Estimate something like 30-60 topics in each of 40 -50 local markets in the US  (give or take something)(there could be LOTS LOTS more topics)

 

Every one of these pages is structured incredibly similarly.  Some little known "hack writer" crafts an article rating these services/businesses in the city.  Each subsection of the article includes short description, a link to one of the businesses. and some other contact info.      The title of the page might be something like   "best dog walking services in Philadelphia" or something like that.  The pages are relatively short, the descriptions per business are about 1 paragraph, and the writers are unknowns.  The pages on the corporate sites, btw, have a ton of Google Adsense on them.  (Ironic...isn't it???   :D)

 

In my view the pages are the "google variation" on farmer quality content.  These pages are dated and they started showing up in conjunction with the announcement by MC.  

 

Its real cr@ppy @ss content given authority by google...but its farmer site quality garbage imho.    (of course we have local smb's that were affected by this stuff, which is how and why I discovered it and have such a problem with them.

 

Now these pages also show in Bing.  They simply tend not to show as highly in Bing serps.  Google yanked the pages up in serps.  It diffuses traffic to the actual business sites...and its mediocre non expert garbage content with a title and a corporate website that gives them the "aura" of expertise.

 

Boy that stuff makes me mad.

 

(RANT OVER).   

 

What is expertise or not???   I think you have to read it and determine that on your own.  If Einstein and I were reading an article on math or physics I might believe its fantastically educational and informative.  Einstein might fall asleep because it is so beneath him.  



#8 Ken Fisher

Ken Fisher

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 375 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 04:03 PM

About how long do you all allow yourself to stay on a page to get this information?

 

 

CTRL + F.



#9 test-ok

test-ok

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 357 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 04:24 PM

About how long do you all allow yourself to stay on a page to get this information?

 

 

Depends...did I see a lot of sites that looked like they have what I want in the results I searched?

is the info I'm looking for easily found? do I have a lot of ad's that are catching my eye? I guess it depends on the site it's self.

 

How do you know it has what you are looking for?

 

because it's easily found and the site looks to be creditable, however depending on what I'm looking for, I'll check other results to see if they all contain similar info.  Just because it's easy to find doesn't mean the info is correct, I'll check others then make my decision as which one to believe...if that's what yer askin.

But then I don't believe anything I read and only half of what I see.



#10 TheAlex

TheAlex

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 209 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 04:44 PM

I like websites that don't make me think, unless it's the content that's meant to make me do the thinking.



#11 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13454 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 02:49 PM

That 2nd question leads me to a google algo point from about 2 years ago that really burns my butt.    I think about 2 years ago MC announced an algo impact that received little commentary or response.  He referenced that certain websites were deemed authoritative would sit higher in serps.

 

...so about 2 years ago some "cr@ppy @ssed" pages from some big corporate website with structures that look like   cityA.coroporateURL dot com, cityB.corporateURL dot com started showing up for an incredible variety of local search terms for a huge variety of services and businesses.  Estimate something like 30-60 topics in each of 40 -50 local markets in the US  (give or take something)(there could be LOTS LOTS more topics)

 

Exactly.

 

I think that the mistake on the part of SEO's who jump on announcements like this from Cutts create new plans to game the system and place bets on new horses to see which one comes in first.

 

Nobody cares about the horse, its health - training - personality.

 

The goal is to win rank.

 

I feel that that what is missing is a basic understanding of people and what we desire.  What we desire is not the same as providing what we need or what.  Desire is something we know when we know it.  It's that subjective part you were talking about...the Don't make me think - the impulse to CTRL + F.

 

I get the data on time on site and guidelines that we have 5 seconds to convince someone to stay on a page, but nobody knows what to do to increase time on a  page or how to work past that 5 seconds.  UX people are trying but they are few because I don't think they have the support from their companies to figure out the puzzle.

 

Desire is feeling.  How does a web site know what a visitor is feeling, so that it can deliver the right response to their search query?  It doesn't.  Pages and entire websites are built on keyword data.  Its a one dimensional approach and I believe we expect more from the web sites we visit.



#12 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1280 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 05:31 AM

Of all the studies and research done on user experience design for
websites and applications,the one thing we can count on are the
complaints.

 

Because UX method is heavy in usability. All barriers and no motive. For that you need desirability design. And that was not included in the UX Umbrella.

 

Users think. Users don't want to be forced to think about the developer's agenda, constraints, of misconceptions about use.

 

Users didn't want to think about how to scroll. Testing proved users didn't scroll, right up until they did. Based on this changing behavior, a design best practice emerged you should put everything above the fold.

 

Users evaluated then adopted a desirable behavior.

 

Now, based on the erronious belief users will scroll no matter what, you have the splash page/header. You have parralax designs so dependent on scrolling, you'd think it was and ancient hand-crank device called a Kinematoscope. Design is its own design problem.

 

I feel that that what is missing is a basic understanding of people and
what we desire.  What we desire is not the same as providing what we
need or what.

 

When methodology like Kansei engineering falls under the UX Umbrella diagram, the understanding can happen. Where it does not, everything is subjective and that means UX just sorta, kinda, happens. Which is fine, just as long as nobody presumes to have intended or designed for that.

 

And thus crumbles the UXD house of cards.

 

Know what upsets the usability-centric, testing for habituation rather than usability, world view? Game design. Why? Desirability design.


Edited by DCrx, 12 July 2014 - 05:40 AM.


#13 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4567 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 12:52 PM

Way back when it was not unknown for webdevs to consider aspects of game design theory when creating sites simply because how the visitor reacted to and with their site was much more critical than most appreciate now, although that may be changing.

In the beginning web navigation was via directories or link wheels or link pages and it was more site than page recommendation; once on the site the site design itself was required to draw the visitor hither and yon. As SEs developed sites gradually became mere holders for individual pages especially after AdSense and similar; sites became much less an entity more a container for brochures, Knowledge Base writ large.

However, some of us continued on our own rather antiquated way trying to make our sites an interesting experience allowing visitors to delve as deep as broad as long as they had time for. The site was an epic of related serial and parallel stories. Visitors needed to have their questions answered while simultaneously being held by being implicitly asked is doing this better than doing that? Why? Choices such that even while on their journey through the site the link not taken nudges a return.

Think of an information site as narrative puzzle game: provide meaningful choices in context to the current page while minimising over complicated branching, too many choices impede decision.

Think of an eCommerce site's visitors as game players filling their baskets to accomplish goals rather than random actions. As in a game ensure, for instance, that visitor error is NOT irrevocably tied to loss of item(s) or purchase sequence position.

Think of how games design in emotion and how that might transfer to a site; atmosphere, subject matter presentation, narrative significance, identification with subject(s)...

Think of how games create consistent reliable systems - should not a website also be perceived to reliably behave consistently by visitors?

Think about making your site fun. Or, at least not boring.

Why?
Well besides it simply being better for the visitor it is increasingly better, even necessary, for the webdev. As SEs add zillions of new pages to their index they have a serious growing problem that can be summed in the old acronym: GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out.

The good stuff, which has always been the cream on top of every niche, is increasingly lost in the water and scum that is indexed just as readily; bots and algorithms being inherently dumb content is simply that without human discrimination abilities.

Increasingly, SE referred visitors are NOT ending up on a page that answers their query. Increasingly search is a game where the visitor is dropped in the middle of who knows where and needs to get somewhere. For that somewhere to be on your site YOU have to help. How's your game theory? How is it being applied? How can it be done better? How can you virtually take that visitor by the hand get them past the snakes (and the back button) to where they need/want/desire to be? Swoop in and save them from the consequences of a query result...

 

Increasingly SEs are trying to hold their visitors by answering their questions on their site, without having to refer them on to (your) others' sites. You need to go beyond mere facts, to add flesh aka background, history, context...story. If you do not your search traffic will wither even without penalties or competition within results.

 

And, as DCrx has long reiterated: such design requires desirability, persuasion and much more that most popular frameworks and webdev teachings miss, misrepresent or avoid.



#14 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1280 posts

Posted 13 July 2014 - 09:37 AM

Back in the day the buzzword was stickyness. And the design attrocity of the moment was java games shoehorned where they did not belong. Absolute irrelevance. 

 

Undesirable.

 

Usability has no concept of game behavior and game dynamics. Apply usability to tic-tac-toe. The game puts too many steps and offers way too many choices for task completion. The usable redesign would eliminate all but one box. You Tic, you win. Tac and toe frustrate the user.

 

The complete design universe, the alpha and the omega of design. Social. Email. Collaboration. All.

 

 

And this design world view is why ecommerce is built around a vending machine model and everything online is about driving the price to zero where the term value has lost all meaning and might as well be stricken from the language as synonymous with price.

 

There is no ecommerce shopping cart. It's the little bin your selection drops into at the bottom of the vending machine. Explains most of the conundrums people find inexplicable. UXD can offer only the vague hunch something else is out there, somewhere. Before UX was engagement. Before engagement was atunement. Before atunement was progressive immersion.

None of which has the detail I just talked about, right here. You can disagree with me. You can test what I say. Not so with these buzzword compliance experts.


Edited by DCrx, 13 July 2014 - 10:01 AM.


#15 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4567 posts

Posted 13 July 2014 - 01:56 PM

There is no ecommerce shopping cart. It's the little bin your selection drops into at the bottom of the vending machine.

Thank you. That description sums up so much that I have felt but been unable to properly articulate.



#16 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13454 posts

Posted 15 July 2014 - 09:36 AM

For that you need desirability design. And that was not included in the UX Umbrella

 

It still isn't.  Finding a voice in the forest of UXUI/Conversions that addresses desirability is the same as it was 10 years ago - just about impossible.  In fact, a company I worked for removed the desirability section from the site audits I did for clients, claiming it was not important or wanted by their clients.

 

I'm pursuing a kindness experience.  We deserve to be treated with respect when we interact with sites, even if the only task is reading there.  This is a nearly impossible idea to sell to companies who only want to invest in links, PPC and social strategies.  People are not robots and we sense, as we engage with web sites, when we are treated as if this is all we are.



#17 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1280 posts

Posted 15 July 2014 - 03:10 PM

I get what you mean, but reading without desirability is just bad writing.

 

Nowhere else would it be put up with. No other medium.

 

>This is a nearly impossible idea to sell to companies who only want to invest in links, PPC and social strategies.

 

Zeldman talks about the earliest days of web standards. You didn't offer it as an option, you just did it. All the time. Every time.

 

There is one, very tiny, plus to UXD. It's very easy to include anything at all. Because UXD has gotten away with a lot less. One of the reasons to argue it's all just design.

 

If some turn of fortune gets clients clamoring for "gamification," so much the better. What you do not do is open up the buffet and let cafeteria clients pick and choose. They'll go straight for whatever buzzword they just read about, with a side order of usability.

 

I do love the designer who tells me how they know all there is to know about Cialdini and study Captology, but they can't get the client to pay their invoice. Meanwhile I got paid $250 for two powerpoint slides ... just to get the client to hire me for quite a lot more. I wasn't event there to give the Powerpoint pitch.

 

You read that right. I was just barely involved in the process of getting me hired. And I got paid for getting me hired.

 

What is Getting Real by 37signals? It is a sales pitch potential clients pay to get. They pay before they work with 37signals.

 

It's called Desirability. Are you sure you're doing it right?


Edited by DCrx, 15 July 2014 - 03:49 PM.




RSS Feed


Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: web design, ux, usability, marketing, neuroscience

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users