3 ms·
When I was a/b testing UI designs for a stable of eCommerce sites, quite often the blatantly fugly design would convert much better. Especially for low-price-dr
by nikatwork 13y ago
When I was a/b testing UI designs for a stable of eCommerce sites, quite often the blatantly fugly design would convert much better. Especially for low-price-driven sites. My personal theory was that people figure the unpolished, crappy looking site is more bargain-driven (kinda like a dingy dollar store in real life).
Sticking a giant firetruck-red "CONVERT" button surrounded by flames and rainbows really does sell better. But boy does it look awful.
- jonknee 13y agoThis is also evidenced by Amazon.com still looking really crowded and ugly. They test every last thing and if this is what they're using, it's because it works.
- scrapcode 13y agoThis same concept goes for those horrendously ugly, cookie-cutter, inline sales pages plastered with maroon Comic Sans headlines that have highlighter-yellow backgrounds. I've been there and done that, and the facts prevail. As a good/(as in one that creates aesthetically pleasing things) designer, you actually suck conversion wise. I haven't done much research behind it, but I believe this has to do with why the flat UI is so pleasing. I can only imagine that it is easy for anyone to notice that it's beautiful regardless of technological/design experience/knowledge.