by Skellie
Readers only have so much attention to give, and this variable will expand and contract depending on factors you can’t control: whether they are rushed for time, whether they have had your site recommended to them or have simply stumbled across it, and so on.
Reader attention doesn’t expand depending on how much information your site communicates to them. More elements does not mean they will devote more attention to compensate.
The visualization above is designed to show how a set amount of reader attention is distributed differently across two different sites: the top, a site which has not simplified down to essentials, and bottom, a site which has. The visualization represents the ‘initial sweep’ of reader attention, in which a reader rapidly determines where and how to focus on your layout.
It’s intended to resemble a blog layout, with a left sidebar, content and headline in the middle, a right sidebar, topped by a header. The layout isn’t meant to suggest a concrete design for your site, and the boxes and rectangles could be switched around to any other configuration. It does aim to show how the way attention is distributed changes depending on what is emphasized by your design.
A site mixing unimportant and essential elements ensures reader attention is split, divided, unfocused, and sometimes squandered. The most important aspects of your site will often get lost in the mix.
A site simplified down to its essential elements ensures reader attention is lazer-focused on what matters. More attention devoted to specific elements means more interactivity, more resonance, and greater understanding.
Your design isn’t an ornament — it’s a means to those crucially important ends.
This article has explained the why of simplifying your design. The articles below explain how, from a variety of perspectives: usability, uncluttering, minimalism, and simplicity.
Skelliewag features daily discussions on content creation, great ideas you can use, and design tips. Join the community by subscribing!
rss feed
16 Comments, Comment or Ping
Arjun Muralidharan
Skellie, I recently did a complete redesign of my site (yet again) that went totally frugal on site elements, yet I tried to retain most of the functionality.
It’s really very simple, text-based (thus faster to load) and is pretty straight-forward. I’m only still working on rebuilding images, as I had a major data crash recently, losing all of it.
cupofchai.net
Oct 8th, 2007
Pinyo
Another clever post on the subject of usability. I am continually impressed with your work.
Oct 8th, 2007
Patrick
Simply awesome, Skellie. I’m pouring over my website right now, using your guide as a lens. I guess it’s a tradeoff between density and simplicity. I want to give the reader all this info and all these links, but how much is too much? Awesome post, Skellie. Thanks.
Oct 8th, 2007
Mason from SmallFuel Marketing
Skellie - Brilliant way to simplify and explain why simplicity is crucial and clutter is bad.
Patrick - the way to keep it simple and still have the information is to subordinate the things of lesser importance. Make sure the important things stand out, and the less important ones are hidden or unobtrusive until they are relevant.
In the end, you still need to remove anything that isn’t really serving the reader.
- Mason
Oct 8th, 2007
Christopher
Your advice has caused me to re-think my layout many, many times. I even sent a review request… I can imagine the responses you got for that offer and totally understand why I didn’t hear from you.
However, how do you feel about 1 post being featured and not a long list of past post? My approach is to eventually market each individual post and allow readers to sort of discover the site. Article/Post first, blog as a whole secondly.
By the way very informative site I reference you and problogger heavily. Aussie bloggers rock!
Oct 9th, 2007
Faye
This is how I learn best, seeing charts and graphs and things. For me, it’s so much easier to digest and apply. Very sharp, Skellie.
Oct 9th, 2007
pablopabla
The chart does the trick. I agree with you, Skellie. I was just discussing with a blogger pal yesterday on making her blog less cluttered. Her blog was like the upper image where a reader’s attention was divided as it was filled with “noise”. It’s getting better now. I should just direct her to your site for all the tips.
Oct 9th, 2007
skellie
@ Arjun: I like where you’re going with the theme — very simple. One thing I’d suggest would be to keep the article headlines in line with the post body. Otherwise, it’s definitely heading in the right direction.
@ Christopher: The review is still in the queue, but I’ve developed a bit of a backlog. You will definitely get it, it’s just a question of when!
Do you mean featuring one post in the main page (rather than several, from most recent backwards), or are you referring to posts featured in the sidebar?
@ Pablo: It’s great to see someone sharing the philosophy with others. That brings a smile to my face :).
Oct 9th, 2007
Danielle Blogging for Balance
Can’t even remember how I ended up here…but I’m glad I did. I have to really monitor myself in keeping my blog clutter at a minimum. I have recently been toying with the idea of a ‘Top Posts’ section and I like how you have included the photos…nice touch. Great information here!!
Oct 9th, 2007
Christopher
Yes ma’am featuring one post on the main page, bad idea? That seems super minimal to me, my ultimate goal. Just curious.
Also I understand the backlog on the review request, your information on this blog alone is valuable! I can imagine the request are extensive so no biggie I understand.
Oct 10th, 2007
skellie
@ Christopher: I would say featuring only one post probably isn’t minimalism, because it’s taking away something important. Having a number of posts on the main page (maybe five, for example) shows new visitors straight away that your site has depth and value to it. I’d always suggest giving your content emphasis, rather than hiding it away :).
I look forward to doing the review — your site has plenty of potential, and I love the premise!
Oct 10th, 2007
Reply to “Whiteboard: Why Less Is More In Design”