|
|
UI Design Update
Newsletter April, 2001
Insights from
Human Factors International

| In
This Issue: |
|
|
| |
|
|
| Response
Times |
|
Bob
Bailey, Ph.D., Chief Scientist for HFI, asks the question:
In a well-designed
website, how long should users have to wait for
pages to download? |
| |
|
|
| The
Ergonomic Pragmatist |
|
Dr.
Eric Schaffer, Ph.D., CPE, founder and CEO of HFI offers practical
advice. |
| Acceptable Computer Response Times |
| |
|
|
| Question:
|
|
In a well-designed
website, how long should users have to wait for pages to download?
|
| |
|
|
| Past
studies: |
|
Using the research
that was available to them, Miller (1968), Bailey (1982) and Shneiderman
(1984) recommended that the computer should respond to users within
two seconds. Martin and Corl (1986) reported that with most data
entry tasks there was no advantage of having response times that
were faster than one second, and found a linear decrease in productivity
with slower response times (from one to five seconds). With problem
solving tasks, which are more like Web interaction tasks, they found
no reliable effect on performance up to a 5-second delay.
With websites
we have had all kinds of interesting maximum "wait time"
numbers proposed over the last few years. Most were based on educated
guesses, and most have proposed a number (e.g., 8 or 10 seconds)
that took into account that loading Web pages would be much slower
than the "two seconds" suggested in earlier studies. So
how slow is too slow?
|
| |
|
|
| Many
issues are involved: |
|
One reason
that acceptable response times are so difficult to determine is
that people's expectations for acceptable response times differ
from situation to situation. Users seem willing to wait varying
amounts of time for different types of interactions. The amount
of time a user is willing to wait appears to be a function of the
perceived complexity of the request. For example, people will wait
longer for requests they think are hard or time-consuming for the
computer to perform.
Paula Selvidge
and Barbara Chaparro at Wichita State University, and Gregory Bender
at IBM, conducted a study to examine the effect of download delays
on user performance. They used delays of 1 second, 30 seconds, and
60 seconds. They felt that longer delays (30 or 60 seconds) would
increase frustration, and decrease task success and efficiency.
They found that users were less frustrated with the one-second delay,
but their task success and efficiency were not affected by either
the 30 or 60 second response times.
|
| |
|
|
| Acceptable
wait times: |
|
One of the
best recent series of studies was conducted by Anna Bouch (University
College - London), Allan Kuchinsky and Nina Bhatti (Hewlett Packard
Labs - Palo Alto). They attempted to identify how long users would
wait for pages to load.
Users were
presented with Web pages that had predetermined delays ranging from
2 to 73 seconds. While performing the task, users rated the latency
(delay) for each page they accessed as high, average or poor. Latency
was defined as the delay between a request for a Web page, and totally
receiving that page.
They reported
the following ratings:
|
High (good): |
Up to
5 seconds |
|
Average: |
From 6
to 10 seconds |
|
Low (poor): |
Over 10
seconds |
In a second
study, when users experienced a page loading delay that was unacceptable,
they pressed a button labeled "Increase Quality." The
overall average time before pressing the "Increase Quality"
button was 8.6 seconds.
In a third
study, they had the Web pages load incrementally with the banner
first, text next and graphics last. Under these conditions, users
were much more tolerant of longer latencies. The test subjects rated
the delay as "good" with latencies up to 39 seconds, and
"poor" for those over 56 seconds.
|
| |
|
|
| Negative
impressions: |
|
Negative impressions
of a website, that seem to have little to do with waiting, may be
related to how long users must wait for pages to download. Ramsay,
Barbesi and Preece (1998) examined the effect of page loading delays
on users' perceptions of websites. Their delays ranged from two
seconds to two minutes. Users rated pages on "interesting content,"
and the difficulty with which the page could be scanned. They found
that pages with longer delays (41 seconds or longer) were rated
as less interesting and more difficult to scan. In another study,
participants felt that the slow loading of Web pages suggested that
(a)
products being sold were of inferior quality, and
(b) the security of their purchases may be compromised.
|
| |
|
|
| Conclusions: |
|
Even after
years of research, the complex relationship between
computer response time and user performance and satisfaction is
not totally clear. It seems that acceptable downloading times can
range from five to over 30 seconds. The delays that are "acceptable"
seem to depend on what tasks users are performing, and the
difficulties they believe the computer is encountering. For example,
users will tolerate only short delays if they believe that the task
should be quick and easy for the computer.
Slow computer
response times:
(a) may reduce the amount of work that users can do,
(b) probably have little practical effect on errors,
and
(c) can be frustrating.
As users interact
more with a website their frustration with
downloading delays seems to accumulate. In general, the longer
users interact with a site, the less delay they will tolerate.
|
| |
|
|
| References |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Bailey, R.W.
(1982), Human Performance Engineering (1st Edition), Prentice-Hall:
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Bouch, A.,
Kuchinsky, A. and Bhatti, N. (2000), Quality is in the eye of
the beholder: Meeting users' requirements for Internet quality of
service, CHI 2000, 297-304.
Miller, R.
B. (1968), Response time in user-system conversational transactions,
In Proceedings of the AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, 33,
267-277.
Martin, G.L.
and Corl, K.G. (1986), System response time effects on user productivity,
Behaviour and Information Technology, 5(1), 3-13.
Ramsay, J.,
Barbesi, A. and Preece, J. (1998), A psychological investigation
of long retrieval times on the World Wide Web, Interacting with
Computers, 10, 77-86.
Selvidge, P.R.,
Chaparro, B. and Bender, G.T. (2000), The world wide wait: Effects
of delays on user performance, Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES
2000 Congress, 1-416-1-419.
Shneiderman,
B. (1984), Response time and display rate in human performance
with computers, Computing Surveys, 16, 265-285.
|
| |
|
|
| The Ergonomic Pragmatist |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Bob's article
reminds us that our current web technology is only the beginning.
It is painfully inadequate in many ways. But, to be practical, we
must work with that technlogy. To this end, remember that it does
NOT matter so much how long a page takes to load. What matters is
how long before the user can begin productive work. Therefore, work
with the technology to get the user working fast.
When you insert
an image, include a height and width flag in your HTML code. This
makes the browser draw a box for the image and display text first.
Get the user reading and THEN display the image. Also, use methods
like pre-loads. If the user is going to spend some time on the home
page, add images that will be used further down in the site. Make
these images 1 pixel by 1 pixel so they are not seen. But they will
be in cache and will appear to open instantly when the user goes
to the next page.
|
3-day
Annual User Interface Update Seminar
presented by Dr. Robert Bailey
Suggestions, comments,
questions?
HFI editors at

|