The four different splash pages we created were designed to test two design choices.
These were done across four splash pages, so that each design choice could be tested independently.
- Splash 0: No login, Section buttons on side
- Splash 1: Login, Section buttons on side
- Splash 2: No login, Section buttons on top
- Splash 3: Login, Section buttons on top
Login form at the top of the page
One hypothesis with the old website, was that the login form could be confusing to users. There is only one section of the website that requires a log-in (the Debt Management Plan) so to have it on every page may make a user think they need to log-in to access other parts of the site. This may also be the reason why a large number of users sign-up for an account, but then never progress through the Debt Management Plan.
Two of the prototype pages (1 and 3) had the login form, the other two (0 and 2) did not.
Results
With the results we got, the login form didn't actually make much difference. The bounce rate (percentage of people leaving the page without going any further into the website) was almost identical to the old home page regardless of whether the login form was there or not.
This would be better to run over a longer period, to ensure that the results aren't being skewed by only a few users.
Also, over a longer period, we would be able to see if more people actually progressed through the Debt Management Plan after signing up (as at present a large percentage do not). To help analyse this, we can save the referring page to our database when someone signs up. This will help us analyse whether people are signing up from the home page (presumably without knowing what the signup is for) or if they are signing up only after reading about the Debt Management Plan.
Placement of section buttons (Mobile only)
As horizontal space is more limited on mobile displays, two different layouts were tested for the main section buttons.
The full-width buttons above the image and text, allowed for a larger button and image but looked more like a header than a button, they also meant that the user had to scroll further down the page to access all of the content.
The buttons to the side of the image meant less scrolling, and looked more like a traditional button that could be pressed, but made the image and button smaller.
Two of the prototype pages (2 and 3) had the buttons above the text, the other two (0 and 1) had them to the left. On desktop views, the button placement was not affected, so analysis was only carried out on mobile users.
Results
These results were much more conclusive.
For the button on the side, the bounce rate was 45.45% and for the button on the top the bounce rate was 75%.
This is a big enough difference to indicate a much better performance for the left-aligned buttons. This is possibly due to the buttons on top appearing more as a "heading" than something that can be clicked.
Future prototypes will include different buttons to make them more obviously "clickable" as even on the left-aligned buttons, they can look a bit flat and some people may not realise they can be clicked.
