Primacy and Recency Effects on Clicking Behavior

As consumers and business increasingly use the Internet, understanding how and why users choose website links or email links becomes correspondingly important. Two recent articles report a monotonic effect of link order and clicking on a link; this means that the higher a link's position in a list of links, the greater the probability that visitors will click on that link. The difference in probability of clicking has important implications for designing webpage navigation for visitors. Here we report on two field experiments that confirm and extend these studies, showing the efficacy of the first link, a primacy effect. Visitors to a site, however, also show an increased tendency to click on links at the end of the list, a recency effect that previous studies failed to note. This article discusses the potential reasons for recency effects, and the implications of serial position effects more generally.

[1]  Chris Hawkins,et al.  Motivation to Think and Order Effects in Persuasion: The Moderating Role of Chunking , 2001 .

[2]  Alan C.B. Tse,et al.  Zapping Behavior during Commercial Breaks , 2001, Journal of Advertising Research.

[3]  S. Asch Forming impressions of personality. , 1946, Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

[4]  J. W. Hutchinson,et al.  Knowledge Calibration: What Consumers Know and What They Think They Know , 2000 .

[5]  Mario J. Maletta,et al.  Primacy Effects and the Role of Risk in Auditor Belief-Revision Processes , 1999 .

[6]  Catarina Sismeiro,et al.  A Model of Web Site Browsing Behavior Estimated on Clickstream Data , 2003 .

[7]  Charles F. Hofacker,et al.  Using server log files and online experiments to enhance internet marketing , 2005 .

[8]  Jack E. Miller Menu pricing and strategy , 1980 .

[9]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  Cognitive Lock-In and the Power Law of Practice , 2003 .

[10]  Curtis P. Haugtvedt,et al.  Message Order Effects in Persuasion: An Attitude Strength Perspective , 1994 .

[11]  H. Schuman,et al.  THE NORM OF EVEN-HANDEDNESS IN SURVEYS AS IN LIFE* , 1983 .

[12]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[13]  Dean Lacy,et al.  A Theory of Nonseparable Preferences in Survey Responses , 2001 .

[14]  Michael T. Elliott,et al.  Predictors of Advertising Avoidance in Print and Broadcast Media , 1997 .

[15]  H. E. Krugman THE IMPACT OF TELEVISION ADVERTISING: LEARNING WITHOUT INVOLVEMENT , 1965 .

[16]  Xinshu Zhao,et al.  Clutter and serial order redefined and retested , 1997 .

[17]  Edith Schonberg,et al.  Visualization and Analysis of Clickstream Data of Online Stores for Understanding Web Merchandising , 2004, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[18]  Jack M. Feldman,et al.  Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. , 1988 .

[19]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  The Effectiveness of Industrial Print Advertisements across Product Categories , 1980 .

[20]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  Consumer Eye Movement Patterns on Yellow Pages Advertising , 1997 .

[21]  R. G. Crowder Principles of learning and memory , 1977 .

[22]  D. Norman,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW PRIMARY MEMORY1 , 1965 .

[23]  Michael Y. Hu,et al.  Are Consumer Survey Results Distorted? Systematic Impact of Behavioral Frequency and Duration on Survey Response Errors , 2000 .

[24]  J. Krosnick,et al.  AN EVALUATION OF A COGNITIVE THEORY OF RESPONSE-ORDER EFFECTS IN SURVEY MEASUREMENT , 1987 .

[25]  Charles F. Hofacker,et al.  Website-generated market-research data Tracing the tracks left behind by visitors , 2001 .

[26]  Ulf-Dietrich Reips,et al.  Financial Incentives, Personal Information and Drop Out in Online Studies , 2001 .

[27]  J. Krosnick,et al.  The Impact of Candidate Name Order on Election Outcomes , 1998 .

[28]  Jonathan G. S. Koppell,et al.  The Effects of Ballot Position on Election Outcomes , 2004, The Journal of Politics.

[29]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  An Information Search Cost Perspective for Designing Interfaces for Electronic Commerce , 1999 .

[30]  Yong Zhang,et al.  Consumer product evaluation: the interactive effect of message framing, presentation order, and source credibility , 2000 .

[31]  Xavier Drèze,et al.  Measurement of online visibility and its impact on Internet traffic , 2004 .

[32]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Presenting risks and benefits to patients , 2002, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[33]  Alan L. Montgomery,et al.  Special Issue: OR/MS and E-Business: Applying Quantitative Marketing Techniques to the Internet , 2001, Interfaces.

[34]  E. Blair,et al.  Cognitive Processes Used by Survey Respondents to Answer Behavioral Frequency Questions , 1987 .

[35]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Digitizing Consumer Research , 2001 .

[36]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[37]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations: , 1986 .

[38]  David W. Cravens,et al.  Fractional Factorial Experimental Designs in Marketing Research , 1973 .

[39]  J. E. Russo,et al.  Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[40]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  When Web Pages Influence Choice: Effects of Visual Primes on Experts and Novices , 2002 .

[41]  J. McLeod,et al.  ALIENATION AND USES OF THE MASS MEDIA , 1965 .

[42]  Matthew Duncan,et al.  Recognition and Recall with Precuing and Postcuing , 2000 .