How Do People Use Websites?

Overview

People do not think about websites one page at a time. They focus on what they came to do.

They may want to check whether they qualify for a service, compare products, find an address, book an appointment or understand what an organisation offers. Sometimes they know exactly what they are looking for. At other times, they begin with only a question or problem.

Website teams often review a site by starting on the homepage, opening the navigation and moving carefully through each section. Visitors rarely have that same overview. They might arrive directly from Google, follow a link in an email, open a page shared by somebody else or reach the website through an AI-generated answer.

Wherever they begin, they work with what they can see at that moment. They scan for signs that they are in the right place, look for language they recognise and choose whichever route appears most likely to move them forwards. When that route stops making sense, they may change direction.

These behaviours affect how websites need to be planned, written and designed.

People use websites in different ways

People arrive for different reasons and work out where to go from what they see.

A visit can begin almost anywhere

The homepage remains an important part of many websites, but it is only one possible entrance. Search results, social media posts, advertising, bookmarks, emails and links from other websites can all take somebody directly to a different internal page. At the same time, a returning visitor might bypass the homepage because they already know where they need to go.

AI search tools introduce another possible way in. Someone could receive part of an answer in an AI-generated response, then follow a citation to a page that provides more detail.

This means important pages need to make sense without depending entirely on what somebody has already read. A visitor should be able to understand what the page is about, whether the information is relevant and what they can do next.

Someone looking for the opening hours of a local support centre may arrive directly on a location page. They should not need to return to the organisation’s homepage and learn how the entire website is arranged before they can confirm when the centre opens or how to get there.

Not every page needs to explain the whole website. It just needs to give people enough context to know where they are and what to do next.

Scanning helps people decide where to focus

The right choice of words makes things easier to recognise

Scanning websites becomes more useful when people see words they recognise.

Organisations often describe information in the same way they do internally. A housing association may refer to ‘Responsive Maintenance’, while a tenant looks for ‘Report a repair’. Visitors tend to look for language that relates to their question, need or intended action.

Neither description is necessarily wrong. The difference is which wording people are more likely to recognise. Internal language is obvious to team members because they use it every day, while visitors need to recognise an option before they can decide whether it is relevant.

This affects navigation labels, headings, website search, link text and buttons. A link called ‘Make a referral’ says more than ‘Access the portal’. Similarly, a button labelled ‘Check your eligibility’ gives a better indication of what will happen than ‘Continue’.

Specialist or statutory language may still be necessary. In those situations, the terms can sit alongside an explanation to help visitors understand more easily. Accurate language should not need somebody to understand how the organisation works before they can use its website.

People notice what stands out

Once people have found words that seem relevant, the visual treatment of those words affects what they notice next.

Visitors do not always weigh up every option. They often choose the heading, link or button that looks most likely to help them. A large button, a prominent content block or a strongly contrasted link can suggest that one route matters more than the others. Problems arise when that visual emphasis does not reflect what the visitor is likely to need.

Choice of wording matters too. Labels such as ‘Learn more’, ‘Click here’ or ‘Get started’ may work when the surrounding information is obvious, but they become less useful when several appear together or when the outcome is unclear.

Some pages need to support several legitimate choices. The design should show how those choices differ and which are most relevant, rather than giving every option the same prominence.

The strongest cue on a page should usually support the main reason somebody is there.

The path is rarely a straight line

Even when people find a useful starting point, they may still change direction.

People may open several pages in separate tabs, return to an earlier result, compare information across different websites or leave a task and continue later. They might use the website navigation for one step and Google for the next. They may begin on a phone before moving to a laptop when the task becomes more involved.

These behaviours do not necessarily show that something has gone wrong. Some tasks involve genuine uncertainty and a need to research and compare information. Choosing a university, arranging care or applying for financial support may involve several visits and comparing information from different sources.

This means that the shortest route is not automatically the best one. Removing a useful explanation might reduce the number of pages somebody visits but make the decision harder.

What matters is whether each step gives the person what they need to keep making progress. Can they tell where they are? Can they return to earlier information? Does the website preserve their progress where appropriate? Are related pages connected in a way that makes sense?

Consider a parent trying to find out whether their child qualifies for free school transport. They may begin with Google and arrive on an eligibility page, open a map to check the distance from home to school, read the application deadline, return to the eligibility rules and then begin a form hosted on another system. The organisation may see several pages and two separate platforms. The parent sees just one task.

People expect familiar things to work in familiar ways

Not everyone knows the same things

Previous experience of websites affects how people expect things to work. How familiar they are with the subject can also change what they need from the page.

Someone who has used a council service before may go directly to an application form. Another person may need to understand whether the service applies to them, what information they will need and what happens after they apply.

A website can support everyone without forcing everybody to go in the same direction. Direct links, search and clear navigation give experienced visitors a faster route. Introductions, definitions, comparisons and related guidance provide understanding for people less familiar with the subject.

Too much explanation can slow down someone who already knows what they need. Too little can leave a first-time visitor unsure which option to choose.

Useful content gives people a quick route when they know what they need, while making further information easy to find for those who need it.

The situation changes how people use a website

The same website may be used differently depending on where someone is, which device they are using and how much time they have.

Someone casually researching at home may have the time to compare things in more detail. The same person looking for urgent travel information on a phone may focus on the first relevant date, location or the clearest next step.

Websites are used in offices, homes, waiting rooms, public places and unfamiliar environments. They are used on large screens and small screens. A slow connection, noisy surroundings, stress or distractions can all change how somebody uses a website. People using assistive technology may also move through a page differently from someone following the visual layout.

A website cannot anticipate every circumstance, but it can avoid making things more difficult when the ideal conditions aren’t there. Important information should remain usable on smaller screens. Interactions should be predictable and essential tasks should remain manageable when someone is interrupted or needs more time.

Too much effort puts people off

Some tasks take time and concentration. Filling in an application, comparing services or reading detailed guidance can all be demanding. A website should not make the task harder than it needs to be.

Unclear navigation, unexplained terminology and repetitive forms all add unnecessary complexity to the task. Likewise, missing prices, dates or eligibility details can force somebody to search elsewhere before they can decide what to do.

Error messages on a form can be especially disruptive. Telling someone that their information is invalid is not enough if the website does not show where the problem is or how to fix it. If their answers then disappear, they may have to start again.

People may not be able to pinpoint what is wrong. They may just feel unsure, frustrated or unable to continue. This is sometimes blamed on short attention spans, but that is too simple. People will concentrate when the task matters and the information is useful. The real question is whether the next step feels worth the effort.

Plan for the task, not one fixed path

The way people use websites does not point to one perfect design. It does provide a more useful starting point for planning one.

Important pages need to work whether visitors arrive directly or from elsewhere. Navigation, search, supporting links and page content should work together rather than rely on everyone starting from the homepage.

The language used on the website should be familiar to visitors while remaining accurate. Important choices should be easy to spot without pushing other useful options out of view. Pages should also be easy to scan, with enough detail for people who need to read more closely.

The same principle applies to forms and interactive services. People need to understand what’s needed, what will happen next and how to get back on track when something goes wrong. Where possible, they should be able to pause, return and continue without losing work.

These decisions need to be considered across the whole process, not just page by page. A page may work well on its own while the overall experience still feels disjointed because the language changes, the next step is unclear or another system behaves differently.

Looking at the full task helps teams spot those gaps. It also allows for more than one sensible way through, rather than assuming everyone will start in the same place and follow the same order.

You need evidence, not guesswork

What we know about how people use websites gives us a useful starting point, but it cannot tell us exactly how every audience will behave.

Analytics can reveal where people arrive, what they search for and how they move through the site. Interviews and usability testing can then help explain what they expected, what they noticed and where they became unsure.

No single source gives the full picture. The aim is to understand enough about what people are trying to do and where the website gets in their way, to make better decisions about content, structure and interaction.

Websites work better when they reflect how people actually use them, rather than how teams expect them to.

How this translates