Home / Culture and Society / Science and Technology / Users Judge Websites Almost Instantly

Users Judge Websites Almost Instantly

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

How long does it take to evaluate a website? As little as 50 milliseconds, or one-twentieth of a second, according to a new study by Canadian researchers published in the journal Behaviour and Information Technology. And not only is a judgment made about the appeal of a site with amazing rapidity — nearly as quickly as the eye can acquire the information — but that first impression has a lasting impact on the observer’s opinion.

Lead researcher of the paper, Gitte Lindgaard of Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, was stunned by the results. “My colleagues believed it would be impossible to really see anything in less than 500 milliseconds,” she told the Nature website.

This certainly emphasizes the importance of good visual design, which we were just discussing yesterday in the context of blogs.

“Unless the first impression is favorable, visitors will be out of your site before they even know that you might be offering more than your competitors,” Lindgaard said. With 60% of more of typical commercial site traffic coming in from search engines, that instant first reaction determines whether the reader stays with the site or immediately goes back to the search engine.

Lindgaard and her team had volunteers glimpse websites, previously rated as particularly plaeasing or jarring to the eye, for roughly the duration of a single frame of standard television footage. The researchers then asked the participants to rate the websites on a sliding scale of visual appeal, and the results correlated very well with with judgments made after much more extensive scrutiny.

These rather amazing results are created by the “halo effect,” whereby the initial snap judgment based strictly on visual appeal colors observers’ opinions as they study the subject, in this case websites, more thoroughly. Their initial favorable reaction can cause them to rate other aspects of the site, such as content, more highly than they would have, and to overlook flaws which otherwise might have bothered them.

This is due to “cognitive bias,” Lindgaard told Nature. People want to be right about their judgments, so continuing to see the rosy side of a site that gave a good first impression provides “proof” to participaants that they made a good initial decision. Lindgaard said this process can be seen all across society. “It’s awfully scary stuff, but the tendency to jump to conclusions is far more widespread than we realize,” she says.

But people who make that 50-millisecond decision that Blogcritics.org is one snappy smoking site: well, they just happen to be right.

Powered by

About Eric Olsen

Career media professional and serial entrepreneur Eric Olsen flung himself into the paranormal world in 2012, creating the America's Most Haunted brand and co-authoring the award-winning America's Most Haunted book, published by Berkley/Penguin in Sept, 2014. Olsen is co-host of the nationally syndicated broadcast and Internet radio talk show After Hours AM; his entertaining and informative America's Most Haunted website and social media outlets are must-reads: Twitter@amhaunted, Facebook.com/amhaunted, Pinterest America's Most Haunted. Olsen is also guitarist/singer for popular and wildly eclectic Cleveland cover band The Props.
  • hmmm, i wonder how pageload delay fits in with this.

    there are some sites that use so much indirection that i don’t bother with ’em anymore. allmusic.com being THE prime example.

  • Eric Olsen

    we have tried to tighten up page load time and simplify wherever possible – we have also come to realize there is such thing as “too much advertising” on a given page and have cut that down as well. It’s an ongoing struggle to meet all of the competing demands

  • This is true for me.

  • Shark

    I agree. I punch out after a nano-second’s glance.

    a few points:


    *Too much info

    *Anything animated

    * a “home” page that makes me click on something to start (ie, go to the actual home page)

    Shark’s Mantra: (yeah, I know you’ve heard it before, but remember it: it will haunt you through the rest of the 21st century)

    “The Universe is Over-designed and Under-Edited.” ©2003 by Shark

  • Thanks, Eric!
    Scary yet exciting..

    “But people who make that 50-millisecond decision that Blogcritics.org is one snappy smoking site: well, they just happen to be right.”

    :-):-) Got that right, too!

  • Eric:
    Since my personal site is on Blogger, and most of the sites I visited for many months were Blogger sites, I must say that seeing the same seven templates ad nauseum became a bit redundant and “boring.”

    Speaking of which, I seem to remember that you had a much different layout awhile back? This one seems much more accessible to me. In fact, it rocks. Form matches function, to my mind, beautifully here. And I’m not just saying that to kiss up (lol).

    I will back away from many blogs that insist on imposing their musical tastes on me–especially if I can’t quickly turn the music off. I flee from these sites as from Satan himself.

    Any site that is difficult to navigate is also off-putting.

    I worked in advertising/recuitment pubs for many years, and have seen well thought out design firsthand in print pubs.. A good design can definitely make all the difference in the world, and an amateurish one can be disastrous. Still, the content behind the slick layout must be strong, or the average reader will probably move on–sooner or later.

    Thanks for a very enlightening post!.