Location matters, especially for non-salient features-An eye-tracking study on the effects of web object placement on different types of websites

Users have clear expectations of where web objects are located on a web page. Studies conducted with manipulated, fictitious websites showed that web objects placed according to user expectations are found faster and remembered more easily. Whether this is also true for existing websites has not yet been examined. The present study investigates the relation between location typicality and efficiency in finding target web objects in online shops, online newspapers, and company web pages. Forty participants attended a within-subject eye-tracking experiment. Typical web object placement led to fewer fixations and participants found target web objects faster. However, some web objects were less sensitive to location typicality, if they were more visually salient and conformed to user expectations in appearance. Placing web objects at expected locations and designing their appearance according to user expectations facilitates orientation, which is beneficial for first impressions and the overall user experience of websites.

[1]  Miriam Yom,et al.  WOOS - Ein Messinstrument für die wahrgenommene Orientierung in Online-Shops , 2004, MuC.

[2]  tephen E. Palmer.  The effects of contextual scenes on the identification of objects , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[3]  Mary C. Dyson,et al.  The effect of violating visual conventions of a website on user performance and disorientation: how bad can it be? , 2008, SIGDOC '08.

[4]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  Expectations and memory in link search , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[5]  N. M. Morris,et al.  On Looking into the Black Box: Prospects and Limits in the Search for Mental Models , 1986 .

[6]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Why structure and genre matter for users of digital information: A longitudinal experiment with readers of a web-based newspaper , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  Klaus Opwis,et al.  Mental models for web objects: Where do users expect to find the most frequent objects in online shops, news portals, and company web pages? , 2010, Interact. Comput..

[8]  Barbara S. Chaparro,et al.  Where's the Search? Re-examining User Expectations of Web Objects , 2006 .

[9]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Modeling the Shape of the Scene: A Holistic Representation of the Spatial Envelope , 2001, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[10]  Michael L. Bernard.  Examining User Expectations for the Location of Common E-Commerce Web Objects , 2003 .

[11]  Klaus Opwis,et al.  Intranet satisfaction questionnaire: Development and validationof a questionnaire to measure user satisfaction with the Intranet , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[12]  A Bargas-AvilaJavier,et al.  Mental models for web objects , 2010 .

[13]  Alexandre N. Tuch,et al.  Vertical versus dynamic menus on the world wide web: Eye tracking study measuring the influence of menu design and task complexity on user performance and subjective preference , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  T. Foulsham,et al.  What can saliency models predict about eye movements? Spatial and sequential aspects of fixations during encoding and recognition. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[15]  F. Bartlett,et al.  Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology , 1932 .

[16]  Ruth V. Small,et al.  Websites that satisfy users: a theoretical framework for Web user interface design and evaluation , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[17]  Tommy Strandvall,et al.  Eye Tracking in Human-Computer Interaction and Usability Research , 2009, INTERACT.

[18]  I. Biederman,et al.  On the information extracted from a glance at a scene. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  Michael L. Bernard.  Developing Schemas for the Location of Common Web Objects , 2001 .

[20]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Some observations on mental models , 1987 .

[21]  Alexandre N. Tuch,et al.  The role of visual complexity and prototypicality regarding first impression of websites: Working towards understanding aesthetic judgments , 2012, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  W. H. F. Barnes.  The Nature of Explanation , 1944, Nature.

[23]  TorralbaAntonio,et al.  Modeling the Shape of the Scene , 2001 .

[24]  Jodi L. Davenport,et al.  Scene Consistency in Object and Background Perception , 2004, Psychological science.

[25]  Benjamin W Tatler,et al.  The central fixation bias in scene viewing: selecting an optimal viewing position independently of motor biases and image feature distributions. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[26]  A Bargas-AvilaJavier,et al.  Intranet satisfaction questionnaire , 2009 .

[27]  Mounia Lalmas,et al.  On saliency, affect and focused attention , 2012, CHI.

[28]  Rocky Ross,et al.  Mental models , 2004, SIGA.

[29]  W VaughanMisha,et al.  Why structure and genre matter for users of digital information , 2006 .

[30]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  Task demands and memory in web interaction: a levels of processing approach , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[31]  I. Biederman,et al.  Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[32]  T. Sanocki.  Time course of object identification: evidence for a global-to-local contingency. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.