[Sigia-l] F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content

[Stewart Dean]

>From: alist146 <alist146 at archimac.org>
>To: sigia-l at asis.org
>Subject: [Sigia-l] F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content
>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:45:23 +0300
>
>I hope the following is new to list members:
>
>http://www.useit.com/alertbox/reading_pattern.html


This is good evidence for why eye tracking is a misleading method of 
discovering user behavour.

We already know westerners start at the top left and then head on down and 
across. We also know that it takes time to find the start of a bit of text 
and reading behavour wil lead to the results given (the last word of a line 
is glanced at, often not looked at directly).  But looking at their 
conclusions...

"Users won't read your text thoroughly in a word-by-word manner. Exhaustive 
reading is rare, especially when prospective customers are conducting their 
initial research to compile a shortlist of vendors. Yes, some people will 
read more, but most won't. "

In other words people scan until they find what they're looking for. Nothing 
new there.


"The first two paragraphs must state the most important information. There's 
some hope that users will actually read this material, though they'll 
probably read more of the first paragraph than the second."

Again awe inspiring obvious. Users don't read instructional copy, will skip 
welcome messages and will latch on to 'shiny' items on the page like imagery 
or distinct buttons.


"Start subheads, paragraphs, and bullet points with information-carrying 
words that users will notice when scanning down the left side of your 
content in the final stem of their F-behavior. They'll read the third word 
on a line much less often than the first two words."

Again painfully obvious. Bullet lists chunk the information better than a 
stream of text. But these guidelines are not universal. The rules for 
'attraction pages' - that is the front of a site and section hubs need to be 
as to the point as possible. Once the user finds what they are after they 
will read and the rules change. It's best not to break up the flow of copy 
for the sake of usability once the user is in 'digesting' mode. When in 
'seeking' mode clear chunks is the way to go.

User research can uncover this far more effectively and directly than 
indirect methods like eye tracking (and also be much much cheaper and 
accurate due to a more condusive environment).

See the archives for other views on eye tracking.

Cheers

Stewart Dean