Eye tracking studies, cognitive load research, and typographic science translated into plain language for anyone who publishes on the web. No design services. Just the research.
F-pattern reading behavior identified in lab conditions
When someone lands on your article, their brain is already running a fast, mostly unconscious assessment. The eye moves before the mind commits. Research into how people process digital text has been accumulating since the early days of the web, and the findings keep pointing in the same direction.
Most content is never fully read. Readers scan. They pattern-match. They decide within seconds whether the page is worth their sustained attention. Understanding the mechanics behind that decision is useful for anyone who writes for the web.
This blog organizes that research. It does not sell design services or consulting. It explains what the studies found and what those findings mean in practical terms for writers, editors, and independent publishers.
Four bodies of research that change how thoughtful publishers approach their work.
Two dominant scanning patterns emerge consistently in eye tracking research. Neither looks like the orderly left-to-right reading most writers assume their audience performs.
Read the breakdown
Scroll depth data collected across a wide range of content types reveals a consistent pattern. The drop-off is steep, early, and largely independent of article length.
Read more
Readability research ties specific typographic choices to measurable changes in how long people stay with a piece of text. The numbers are more precise than most writers expect.
Read moreBullet lists are a staple of web writing. They serve scanning readers well. Research into persuasion and argument processing suggests they work against you when you need a reader to actually change their mind.
Read more
Every post here starts with a published study, a peer-reviewed paper, or a documented industry research report. The research gets read carefully, its methodology noted, and its findings translated into language that does not require an academic background to understand.
This is not a site about UX design services. It does not offer audits, consultations, or redesigns. The focus is narrow: understanding the psychology of how people read digital content and what that understanding means for the people who create it.
Every claim traces to published research or documented data.
Findings are explained in terms of what they mean for your writing decisions.
This is purely a reading and reference resource. Nothing is for sale.
Speed reading techniques are popular. The research on what they do to comprehension is less often cited. A look at the trade-offs.
Continue readingThe fold is not a fixed location on modern devices. But attention still concentrates heavily near the top of any page. Why this is and what it means for how you structure your opening.
Continue readingScreen size changes more than layout. Touch navigation, thumb reach zones, and ambient context all shape reading behavior in ways that desktop research does not capture.
Continue readingThe old preference for sans-serif on screens was shaped by low-resolution displays. Screen resolution has changed. The research conclusions are shifting along with it.
Continue readingQuestions about the research or a topic you would like to see covered.