Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test • Hacker News Board

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#41

Post by tcarnell » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 10:34 AM UTC

cycojesus wrote: post #39

Color me unsurprised. The grid calls for bi-dimensional navigation while the list is mono-dimensional, less brain cycles burnt to go through it.

exactly, I find navigating a vertical list much less 'stressful' than trying to understand the ordering of a matrix while trying to digest the actual product info.

Also the eye is attracted first to the product images then moves naturally to the right to read the description, with the matrix the eye has to move less naturally downward to read the related product info.

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#42

Post by tcarnell » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 10:41 AM UTC

dfischer wrote: post #15

I assumed list would do better. There's basic underlying usability rules that permeate through everything. The human eye scans like an F. It's almost the golden rule of design. Always build your layouts in an F structure for the most important items. A list design goes hand in hand with complimenting the F average.

Interesting - have you got any external links you can post about this 'F' behaviour? I'd be interesting in reading them!

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#43

Post by epo » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 11:51 AM UTC

Testimonial here, bought teas from Chris earlier this year, the products and the service are both very good indeed.

If your experience of Chinese tea is getting a pot of Jasmine in a restaurant, try these, it will be a revelation.

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#44

Post by epo » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 11:53 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #16

teye wrote: post #4

Not surprising at all. Conventional layout wisdom says give the eye a clear path in a direction it knows. A multi-dimensional grid takes you in a Z shape, whereas a vertical lineup's images and text are all aligned and easier to distinguish.

I was surprised that the author was assuming everyone would guess the grid view would do better. It seems completely obvious to me that a list view is better.

I am surprised you would assume that everyone would think like you.

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#45

Post by dazbradbury » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 1:01 PM UTC

andrewfelix wrote: post #18

Can someone let the guys over at The Verge( http://www.theverge.com/ ) know? That layout is driving me nuts. Which is a shame because they have some talented writers.

You could use: http://mobile.theverge.com/

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#46

Post by mattmanser » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 1:49 PM UTC

westiseast wrote: post #28

guynamedloren wrote: post #23

The author made one glaring mistake: basing "performance" on click through rates. What really matters on an ecommerce site is revenue. So which format resulted in a higher revenue? You'd be silly to make the assumption that greater click through = greater revenue.

Yep, 100% correct. Although in this case, my justification is - the 'distance' between this product listing and an actual purchase is maybe 4 steps total (ie. view product, add to basket, give details, pay), and there are decreasing response percentages at each step. If I tried to measure actual sales with my current tool the test would take much much longer to conclude. Rest assured, I've got AB tests running elsewh…

But this makes your entire article nonsense, do you not get that?

People could have been clicking through more because one was better at conveying information than the other, so they didn't need to click through to make a purchasing decision. Maybe the list meant that they ignored the text?

What if the end result is you still only sold 20 boxes of tea for each? Your assumption would then be wrong, the grid would be better because it's serving less page views.

What if because the consumer had to click around more you actually had less sales? They took too long to find what they wanted?

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#47

Post by suking » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 2:04 PM UTC

peng wrote: post #35

If you're going to A/B test something, you need to reduce the variables down to one. For all you know, the supposedly 'pretty' framing and box-shadow you added to the grid layout may actually be what's causing customers to prefer the flat list. Testing multiple variables in a given trial makes it impossible to discover which change (or combination thereof) actually improved the conversion rate.

Well, they could have done a multivariate test if there was enough traffic to make it statistically significant and tested all combos, like GWO allows.

Re: Vertical vs. grid product listings - a surprising AB test

#48

Post by banjomonster » Fri, Nov 11, 2011, 2:57 PM UTC

tcarnell wrote: post #42

dfischer wrote: post #15

I assumed list would do better. There's basic underlying usability rules that permeate through everything. The human eye scans like an F. It's almost the golden rule of design. Always build your layouts in an F structure for the most important items. A list design goes hand in hand with complimenting the F average.

Interesting - have you got any external links you can post about this 'F' behaviour? I'd be interesting in reading them!