From: Dave Collier-Brown <dave.collier-Brown@indexexchange.com>
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Unconscious Physiological Effects of Search Latency on Users and Their Click Behaviour
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:04:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7463f2a-c5e8-3d0c-36c1-8515ebc7fa9f@indexexchange.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw43R6AA92dDYG6Mypa1G_dBTY_LLNrc-_ugK6MrXK8rWA@mail.gmail.com>
Yes, I had a fun argument with a queuing-networks guy over that, with 3
seconds being a red flag in the paper we were looking at.
Another was 30 seconds, where a huge plurality of the subjects had
forgotten where they were, and had to visibly stop and stare at the
screen to figure out what to do next.
--dave
On 4/19/22 10:20, Dave Taht wrote:
> "As the response latency of the search engine reaches higher val-ues,
> the arousal and the negative valence of the experienced emotions
> increase as well. Although those effects did not produce changes on
> the *self-reported data*, their impact on users’ physiological
> responses was evident. Thus, even if such short latency increases of
> under 500ms are not consciously perceived, they have sizeable
> physiological effects."
>
> GOOD paper:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282009221_Unconscious_Physiological_Effects_of_Search_Latency_on_Users_and_Their_Click_Behaviour
>
> 3sec is the maximum pain point....
>
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
dave.collier-brown@indexexchange.com | -- Mark Twain
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER : This telecommunication, including any and all attachments, contains confidential information intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. Any dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and is not a waiver of confidentiality. If you have received this telecommunication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail and delete the message from your inbox and deleted items folders. This telecommunication does not constitute an express or implied agreement to conduct transactions by electronic means, nor does it constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment or an acceptance of a contract offer. Contract terms contained in this telecommunication are subject to legal review and the completion of formal documentation and are not binding until same is confirmed in writing and has been signed by an authorized signatory.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-19 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 14:20 Dave Taht
2022-04-19 18:04 ` Dave Collier-Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c7463f2a-c5e8-3d0c-36c1-8515ebc7fa9f@indexexchange.com \
--to=dave.collier-brown@indexexchange.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox