Inspired by some great feedback on our Ecommerce Price Perception and Image Size Study, we wanted to explore price perceptions again, this time related to differing product descriptions.
Do consumers find more value in a blender that makes creamy smoothies and shakes, or a blender with 750 watts of power? What type of product descriptions depict a seemingly high-value product, hedonic ones or utilitarian ones? In this CXL Institute study, we test three different products to explore this question.
We found an interesting, and rather old, eye-tracking study from 2004 and decided to try to replicate a part of it to see how it works today.
This study, conducted through CXL Institute, involved eye-tracking a couple homepages of the New York Times, one from this year, 2016, and one from 2004. Our primary goal wasn’t the comparison to the old study, rather it was to see what were the ‘priority viewing areas’ for how people process a news site and to see if ‘today’s users’ process the contemporary design differently than one from more than a decade ago.
We were asked recently about the effects of using internal promotions (e.g., a discounted product sold within the site) vs. third-party (from an outside business) banner advertising on web site clarity and visitor perceptions.
Our first study used the five-second test to examine whether ads on website homepages distract visitors from understanding a site’s purpose. This follow-up study looks for differences in user perceptions between ad types: internal promotions versus third-party ads.
Ever scroll through a website and get irrationally angry? Maybe it was the slow loading time, the poor design, the frustrating lack of clarity – no matter the case, I’m sure you can relate.
Though you might not like to hear it, a substantial amount of your customers are going through the same thing on your site right now. This is inevitable. The real money comes from finding these common frustrations and fixing them.
What’s the value in a logo?
It’s a question that’s been asked a lot lately, especially with companies like Instagram, Uber, and Google drawing both ire and admiration from their new logo changes.
We all have an opinion (some have strong opinions) on these changes, but no one really measures their effectiveness – which is what matters really.
How do we answer the question: is your logo actually working?
If you’re part of a conversion optimization team, a big part of that job is communicating treatments to other specialists on your team (analysts, designers).
Depending on the scope of the changes, you could use a few different tools and methods.
Almost always, though, this includes wireframing – and it helps to be able to do wireframing decently well.
If you’re a budget brand, there’s nothing wrong with a website that looks kinda cheap.
But if you’re selling expensive watches or clothes? Well, that’s not the message you want to be sending.
Hopefully you have many optimization weapons in your arsenal: digital analytics, A/B testing, click mapping, user testing, etc.
One you may not have thought of (and hence your competitors might not be aware of): eye-tracking and visual engagement analytics.