Web design and online user experience moves at a phenomenal pace – and so it should, lest brands rest on their laurels and fail to keep up with the zeitgeist.
Inspired by an article on the CXBlog, which explores The Myth of the Page Fold: Evidence from User Testing, Tnooz wants to gauge the opinions of readers – and not just UEs and designers – as to where current thinking lies on the issue of placing content and functionality above or below the screen “fold”.
As CX explains, the fold is “commonly used on the web to describe the area you see on a web page before you have to scroll down the page”.
Opinions differ depending on the type of site, especially in travel, where some are focused primarily on booking generation or inspiration.
Thinking specifically about the homepage with the red line indicating the page fold, ponder the travel examples below (and other sites) and add your comments.
Related posts:
The secrets in the design. If it looks like there is something below the fold users will scroll, for example the Carnival page above has the solid blue line that looks like a footer which could discourage scrolling.
80% of clicks will always be above the fold anyway so why not make use of the extra realestate and merchandise below it.
still important but nowhere near as much as it was 2/3 years ago. As technology hs moved on eg. Ajax you can use the space above the the fold to showcase more functionality and messages
As Steve says, use visual clues and compelling content and your users will scroll.
It will be interesting to hear your readers ‘not UEs or Designers’ responses to the above-the-fold myth but as you acknowledge, it’s important to observe what a user actual does versus what a user thinks/ says.
“If we had asked people what they wanted they would have said faster horses.” – Henry Ford.
The fold is a myth, but then it isn’t. I agree with @steve, if you visually draw the reader to expect more below the fold then they are likely to scroll. Heatmapping will show most of the attention at the top of the page, but it is a bit of chicken and egg. Designers put all the big bright boxes at the top of the page.
Easyjet’s is an interesting example. On the face of it, it makes sense to keep the customer journey served above the fold, and the secondary customer journeys below the fold, but I imagine they will get less scroll down than the others (excepting carnival). Most users will not go below the fold because there isn’t great content cut by the fold.
I think people have had enough time to get used to the internet, they know how to scroll.
I did find the question interesting though, and brought it up with my wife and the designers at her consultancy (Senior UX designer) and it was fairly unanimous- Try to keep above the fold but dont sacrifice functionality or usability for the sake of it. I think thats a fairly good rule to go by?
If you can capture the user’s attention and make them want to explore what you offer then scrolling and clicking-through is not really a problem.
CXBlog are spot on in their assessment that putting too much content above the fold is more likely to put users off by bombarding them with information – the trick is to give them a reason to check you out before you lose their attention.
Call me a traditionalist, but I still think focusing a site’s main content and call(s) to action above the fold is the way to go. Why play a game of hide and seek with customers?
I think the key, though, is balancing direct response and branding objectives with usability, and paring these down in a way that is not overwhelming to users.
Also, I find it very interesting that the Southwest Airlines example above is the only one in which a search box is not visible above or below the fold at all.
With most travel purchasing starting with a search, an increasing number of site visitors will arrive on an interior or special landing page. Those who enter the home page URL are most likely a minority. This will reduce the previously very important above the fold issue.
What should be immediately visible above the fold is the key value proposition and the most important selling points to maintain site visitor interest and keeping them from clicking away but rather scroll down for more or go inside the site.
I agree with many of the comments above. Particularly those that emphasize the need to understand visitor behaviour in the context of their customer ‘life-stage’, i.e. From my experience someone just browsing for an inspiring holiday is more likely to view below the fold than someone searching for the cheapest weekend in Rome in November.
Above Graham makes the comments:
“people have had enough time to get used to the internet, they know how to scroll.”
Very true, but this exposes one of the dangers I see in lab based testing and some eye-tracking studies. In real ‘at work’ or ‘at home’ situations web users often just can’t be bothered to scroll and offer much less attention and time to a web page than many designers and site owners expect. This rarely shows up in lab based user testing.
The key here is to understand the difference between motivation and ability. If you’re interested BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model is a good place to start exploring this http://behaviormodel.org/
Thanks Kev for the notification – was off on hols last week. Two points I was going to make well already presented by Ben & Steve but bear repeating.
1) Heatmaps show users read / click top of pages (although some of this may be self-fulfilling if they’re not encouraged to scroll) so put your prime content / hero messaging / offers / fast track to conversion here
2) Use good UX design to stick the head of less premium content above the parapet and signpost so that users can scroll downwards and interact if they wish.
Best way to work out what performs best: test, ideally multivariate. That will tell you what’s happening and which perform better but you’ll always have to deduce why.
Unfortunately of course, clients rarely test – the business case will generally be stronger of course with higher volume sites incremental % increases are less marginal on revenue and worth the investment.