A survey of left and right hand navigation menus on the web: “The hypothesis that the left-hand navigation would perform significantly faster than the right-hand navigation was not supported. Instead, there was no significant difference in completion times between the two test conditions.” (Yes, I’ve been teaching web design.)


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

4 thoughts on “left right

  1. Jamie Blustein

    One of the most digestable sources of tips for web design is at usability.gov. The guidelines are especially popular.

    Yeah, I teach human factors, and web programming. And I attended the panel discussing that web pages guidelines at CHI’03.

  2. Jamie Blustein

    The webpage address was missing from my previous comment, so …

    * The documet is at http://www.usability.gov

    * The guidelines are at http://www.usability.gov/guides

  3. charlie

    One of the things that I noted about that text is that while the navigation menu placement may not be important, the content placement could be:

    “As Nielsen (1999) speculates, a right-hand navigation should direct user attention to the content of the page, which would then be on the left side of the page. This seemed to explain the longer actual completion times of Group 1 for tasks one and two in this study. Moreover, an extra focus on content could increase user interest and understanding of the topic of the page or site.”

    So for bloggers, who want to emphasize their content, right hand menu’s may be best.

  4. Jill

    (I fixed the links in Jamie’s comment, so now they’re visible!)

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]