Once again, I
find myself up to my earlobes in eye tracking data. I have no
one to blame, as I got myself into this mess when I made the
well intentioned but poorly thought out promise to have the
first draft of our follow up study done by the time I head out
on vacation at the end of the month.
In wading through the sessions (about 420 of them) sometimes new
insights rise to the top, and sometimes my eyeballs just roll
back in my head as my hands jerk spasmodically on my keyboard
and drool runs down my cheek. Luckily, this week it was the
former.
In this study, we are looking at interactions with Google,
compared to MSN and Yahoo! Many of you may have heard me speak
about the results at various shows. Recently, one finding in
particular seemed to be screaming out to be noticed. Being a
compassionate sort of researcher, I listened.
Yahoo’s Top Spots Get Noticed
When we looked at interactions with the top sponsored ads, there
was a notable difference between MSN, Yahoo and Google. On MSN
and Google, the percentage of clicks happening on these top ads
seemed to be in line with previous studies done both by us and
by others. But the amount of activity on the Yahoo ads seemed to
be substantially higher. We started out by looking at first
fixations, or the first place people looked on the page, even
for a split second. Here, the engines were all in the same ball
park, with 83.7% of first fixations in top sponsored for Yahoo,
compared to 86.7% for MSN and 80.6% for Google. Then, we looked
at were the first activity on listing happened; where on the
page did people start actually scanning listings. Google held a
good percentage of eye balls, keeping 12.4% of the users, while
MSN had a significant defection issue, losing 36.6% of the
people who first fixated in the top sponsored ads. But Yahoo
lost the fewest, with only 5.5% choosing to look elsewhere. And
finally, Google had 25.8% click throughs on these ads, and MSN
had 16.7% (yes, this is low, but MSN was dealing with a number
of issues at the time of the study). Yahoo led the pack with a
30.2% click through rate. In fact, for the first time ever in
our research, a sponsored link (the number one top sponsored)
out pulled the #1 organic link, at click through rates of 25.6%
vs 14%. This was a complete reversal of the click through ratios
we saw on the other two engines.
For whatever reason, Yahoo’s top sponsored ads seemed to be
locking searchers into their part of the results page to a much
greater extent than Google and MSN.
Why? What the heck was going on? Better ads? Not really. If
anything, Google’s ads seemed a touch more relevant.
Location, Location, Location
Part of it was real estate. Another interesting comparison we
did was to look at the percentages of screen real estate devoted
to various sections of the page. Yahoo has gone out of their way
to make the top sponsored ads the dominant feature on a results
page at 1024 by 768 screen resolution. At this size, the ads
take up 23% of the real estate, compared to approximately 16%
for Google and Yahoo. This pushes organic listings on Yahoo
perilously close to the fold.
And there, as I stared at the screen shots of fully loaded
(maximum ads and vertical results showing) Google, MSN and Yahoo
results at standard resolution, a possible answer revealed
itself. On Google, 3 top sponsored ads, 3 OneBox results, and 3
visible organic listings. On MSN, the same 3:3:3 presentation.
But on Yahoo, there were 4 top sponsored ads, 3 vertical
results, and just one and a half organic listings were visible.
The Rule of 3
Hmmm, 3, 3 and 3. There was something there, niggling in the
back of my mind. Quickly, I did a search for the Rule of 3 and
sure enough, there it was. We humans tend to think in triplets.
3 is a good number to wrap our mind around, and we see it in all
kinds of instances. We tend to remember points best when given
in groups of 3, we scan visual elements best when they come in
3’s, and we like to have 3 options to consider. Think how often
3 comes up in our society: 3 little pigs, 3 strikes, 3 doors on
Let’s Make a Deal, 3 competitive quotes. It’s a tri-ordered
world out there.
So is it coincidence that search results tend to be presented to
us, neatly ordered in groups of 3? I think not. It strikes me
that this engrained human behavior would probably translate to
the search engine results page as well.
Yahoo Breaks the Rule
MSN and Google tend to adhere to the rule of 3 in their layouts
(depending on whether or not Google serves 3 top sponsored ads).
Our choices are conveniently presented in neat trios, with
logical divides between each.
Yahoo breaks the rule by tipping the balance in favor of the top
sponsored ads. First, it provides 4, not 3. Does this mean we
need to spend a little more time up in these results, trying to
fit one extra result into our limited memory slots? That appears
to be the case, with people spending an average of 4.6 seconds
in the Yahoo top sponsored results in our study, compared to 2.4
for Google and 1.73 for MSN.
Secondly, it only gives us one visible organic listing to
consider. It breaks our natural desire to have 3 alternatives,
thereby reducing the Promise of Interest for the organic
listings. In effect, on the screen of results most people would
see on Yahoo, we only have one alternative, the top sponsored
ads.
An earth shaking discovery? Perhaps not. But cut me some slack.
I’ve been looking at eye tracking data daily for 3 months now,
spending about 3 hours each day looking at interactions with the
3 engines. I think it’s time I took the 3 other members of my
family on a 3 week vacation, during which we’ll be visiting 3
countries. Wait a minute! Do I sense a pattern developing?