Nielsen On Mobile Site Usability
Most web folks regard Jakob Nielsen as the guru of website usability and human-computer interaction.
As reported by Melinda Krueger on ClickZ Marketing News, here’s the first item I’ve seen regarding his insights on the usability of mobile sites. I wish it were more thorough, but it’s a start.
Some of Nielsen’s thoughts …
- Mobile user has low commitment to any mobile content, so poor usability is even more of a killer than with computers.
- Users download plenty of apps they soon ignore — casualties of poor usability.
- Apps have the advantage over mobile sites because they’re faster and incorporate features like location, which improve the user experience.
- Don’t require the user to remember things from screen to screen — user won’t use mobile to research or compare large amounts of info.
- Copy must not just be short … it must be ultra-short.
Working against your content is the user’s lack of both commitment and focus — he or she simply won’t take the time and effort to figure out something tricky on mobile. It either works quickly and easily, or the user moves on … either to another app or back to the ‘real’ (i.e. off-mobile) world.
According to Nielsen, big mistakes on mobile include making it too difficult to touch and manipulate (e.g., use large touch targets), and trying to do too much (e.g., don’t overload the first screen, use progressive disclosure to build the experience).
If you want to see Nielsen ‘in action’, read his critique of the Wall St Journal mobile app.
And if you see more from Nielsen on mobile usability, let us know!
Tom
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer