The impact of progress indicators on task completion

A near ubiquitous feature of user interfaces is feedback on task completion or progress indicators such as the graphical bar that grows as more of the task is completed. The presumed benefit is that users will be more likely to complete the task if they see they are making progress but it is also possible that feedback indicating slow progress may sometimes discourage users from completing the task. This paper describes two experiments that evaluate the impact of progress indicators on the completion of on-line questionnaires. In the first experiment, progress was displayed at different speeds throughout the questionnaire. If the early feedback indicated slow progress, abandonment rates were higher and users' subjective experience more negative than if the early feedback indicated faster progress. In the second experiment, intermittent feedback seemed to minimize the costs of discouraging feedback while preserving the benefits of encouraging feedback. Overall, the results suggest that when progress seems to outpace users' expectations, feedback can improve their experience though not necessarily their completion rates; when progress seems to lag behind what users expect, feedback degrades their experience and lowers completion rates.

[1]  Brad A. Myers,et al.  The importance of percent-done progress indicators for computer-human interfaces , 1985, CHI '85.

[2]  J. Krosnick Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys , 1991 .

[3]  M. Traugott,et al.  Web survey design and administration. , 2001, Public opinion quarterly.

[4]  Michael D. Kaplowitz,et al.  A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates , 2004 .

[5]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  You’re Having Fun When Time Flies , 2010, Psychological science.

[6]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Displaying a boundary in graphic and symbolic "wait" displays: Duration estimates and users' preferences , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[7]  James R. Lewis,et al.  Effect of Auditory Waiting Cues on Time Estimation in Speech Recognition Telephony Applications , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[8]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  Soft constraints in interactive behavior: the case of ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  Charles S. Carver,et al.  Velocity Toward Goal Attainment in Immediate Experience as a Determinant of Affect , 2002 .

[10]  M. Couper,et al.  Web Surveys , 2001 .

[11]  J. Krosnick,et al.  National Surveys Via Rdd Telephone Interviewing Versus the Internet Comparing Sample Representativeness and Response Quality , 2009 .

[12]  M. Boltz,et al.  The processing of temporal and nontemporal information in the remembering of event durations and musical structure. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  D Shinar,et al.  Duration estimates and users' preferences in human-computer interaction. , 1996, Ergonomics.

[14]  M. Boltz,et al.  Time estimation and expectancies , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[15]  Melanie D. Polkosky,et al.  Effect of Auditory Waiting Cues on Time Estimation in Speech Recognition Telephony Applications , 2002 .

[16]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .

[17]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Subjective Duration Assessment: An Implicit Probe for Software Usability , 2001 .

[18]  F. Conrad,et al.  Use and non-use of clarification features in web surveys , 2006 .

[19]  Roger Tourangeau,et al.  Should I Stay or Should I go: The Effects of Progress Feedback, Promised Task Duration, and Length of Questionnaire on Completing Web Surveys , 2011 .

[20]  Geert Loosveldt,et al.  An experimental study on the effects of personalization, survey length statements, progress indicators, and survey sponsor logos in web surveys , 2006 .

[21]  J. Kagel,et al.  Winner’s Curse , 2014 .