Design Strategies for Mobile Click-and-Load Waiting Scenarios
Source abstract
Abstract
The optimization of design strategies in loading and waiting scenarios is of great significance for enhancing user experience. This study focuses on the click-to-load waiting scenario in mobile device interfaces and systematically analyzes the user experience performance of three design strategies—the interface type, loading indicator, and layout—across different page transition types (including the tab page, content page, and half-screen overlay). Based on questionnaire responses and experimental data (N = 90) collected from participants aged 20–29, we assessed subjective user perceptions across five validated metrics: time perception, loading speed, satisfaction, emotional valence, and arousal level. The results revealed significant differences among strategies in terms of loading speed perception, time awareness, and emotional responses. Notably, progressive loading strategies proved particularly effective in enhancing user satisfaction and alleviating temporal cognitive load. This study summarizes the characteristics of strategy applicability and proposes general optimization recommendations, offering both theoretical insights and practical guidance for designing loading feedback in mobile device interfaces.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology · Image and Video Quality Assessment · EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
Foshan Taihuo Redbird Technology Co., Ltd., Foshan 528000, China
Department of Industrial Design, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Managing Online Wait: Designing Effective Waiting Screens across Cultures10.1016/j.im.2017.12.001 ↗
2. SWAROVsky: Optimizing Resource Loading for Mobile Web Browsing10.1109/TMC.2016.2645563 ↗
3. Miller, R.B. (1968). Response Time in Man-Computer Conversational Transactions. AFIPS ’68 (Fall, Part I), Proceedings of the Fall Joint Computer Conference, Part I, San Francisco, CA, USA, 9–11 December 1968, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/1476589.1476628 ↗
4. Krishnan, S.S., and Sitaraman, R.K. (2012). Video Stream Quality Impacts Viewer Behavior: Inferring Causality Using Quasi-Experimental Designs. IMC ’12, Proceedings of the 2012 Internet Measurement Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 14–16 November 2012, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/2398776.2398799 ↗
5. A Study on Tolerable Waiting Time: How Long Are Web Users Willing to Wait?10.1080/01449290410001669914 ↗
6. Web Site Delays: How Tolerant Are Users?
7. Affective Responses to System Messages in Human–Computer-Interac-tion: Effects of Modality and Message Type10.1016/j.intcom.2011.05.006 ↗
8. Effect of Loading Symbol of Online Video on Perception of Waitin-g Time10.1080/10447318.2017.1305051 ↗
9. Lallemand, C., and Gronier, G. (2012). Enhancing User experience during Waiting Time in HCI: Contributions of Cognitive Psychology. DIS ’12, Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK, 11–15 June 2012, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/2317956.2318069 ↗
10. Feedback Preferences and Impressions of Waiting10.1177/0018720809345684 ↗
11. Ohtsubo, M., and Yoshida, K. (2014, January 10–12). How Does Shape of Progress Bar Effect on Time Evaluation. Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems, Salerno, Italy.10.1109/INCoS.2014.85 ↗
12. The Effect of Mobile Applications’ Initial Loading Pages on Users’ Mental State and Behavior10.1016/j.displa.2021.102007 ↗
13. Conn, A.P. (1995). Time Affordances: The Time Factor in Diagnostic Usability Heuristics. CHI ’95, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, CO, USA, 7–11 May 1995, ACM Press.10.1145/223904.223928 ↗
14. Countdown Timer Speed: A Trade-off between Delay Duration Perception and Recall10.1145/3380961 ↗
15. Ghafurian, M., and Reitter, D. (2016). Impatience Induced by Waiting: An Effect Moderated by the Speed of Countdowns. DIS ’16, Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 4–8 June 2016, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/2901790.2901830 ↗
16. Harrison, C., Amento, B., Kuznetsov, S., and Bell, R. (2007). Rethinking the Progress Bar. UIST ’07, Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Newport, RI, USA, 7–10 October 2007, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/1294211.1294231 ↗
17. IT Progress Indicators: Sense of Progress, Subjective Sense of Time, User Preference and the Perception of Process Duration10.4018/ijthi.2014070105 ↗
18. The Effect of Visual Feedback Types on the Wait Indicator Interface of a Mobile Application10.1016/j.displa.2019.101928 ↗
19. Harrison, C., Yeo, Z., and Hudson, S.E. (2010). Faster Progress Bars: Manipulating Perceived Duration with Visual Augmentations. CHI ’10, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA, USA, 10–15 April 2010, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/1753326.1753556 ↗
20. Kurusathianpong, P., and Tangmanee, C. (2018, January 11–13). Comparison of Perceived Waiting Time Between Two Lengths of Progress Indicator and Two Styles of Graphics Animation with Perceived Uncertainty as a Covariate. Proceedings of the 2018 Seventh ICT International Student Project Conference (ICT-ISPC), Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.10.1109/ICT-ISPC.2018.8523993 ↗
21. Söderström, U., Bååth, M., and Mejtoft, T. (2018). The Users’ Time Perception: The Effect of Various Animation Speeds on Loading Screens. ECCE ’18, Proceedings of the 36th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 5–7 September 2018, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3232078.3232092 ↗
22. The Duration Perception of Loading Applications in Smartphone: Effects of Different Loading Types10.1016/j.apergo.2017.06.015 ↗
23. Hohenstein, J., Khan, H., Canfield, K., Tung, S., and Perez Cano, R. (2016). Shorter Wait Times: The Effects of Various Loading Screens on Perceived Performance. CHI EA ’16, Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, 7–12 May 2016, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/2851581.2892308 ↗
24. Mejtoft, T., Långström, A., and Söderström, U. (2018). The Effect of Skeleton Screens: Users’ Perception of Speed and Ease of Navigation. ECCE ’18, Proceedings of the 36th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 5–7 September 2018, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3232078.3232086 ↗
25. The Influence of Audio Effects and Attention on the Perceived Duration of Interaction10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102756 ↗
26. Shirai, K., Futami, K., and Murao, K. (2022). Exploring Tactile Stimuli from a Wrist-Worn Device to Manipulate Subjective Time Based on the Filled-Duration Illusion. Sensors, 22.10.3390/s22197194 ↗
27. Time Swipes When You’re Having Fun: Reducing Perceived Waiting Time While Making It More Enjoyable10.1080/0144929X.2022.2155576 ↗
28. User Experience of Loading Design: The Influence of Different Presentation Duration and Type on Time Perception10.1088/1742-6596/1955/1/012076 ↗
29. A Research on Motion Design for APP’s Loading Pages Based on Time Perception10.1063/1.5033739 ↗
30. Hsu, C.-F., Propp, L., Panetta, L., Martin, S., Dentakos, S., Toplak, M.E., and Eastwood, J.D. (2018). Mental Effort and Discomfort: Testing the Peak-End Effect during a Cognitively Demanding Task. PLoS ONE, 13.10.1371/journal.pone.0191479 ↗
31. Zhang, C., Lv, M., Zhang, W., Chen, J., Yang, L., Lv, B., and Wu, T. (2019). Evaluating Scenario-Specific Loading Processes on Mobile Phones. Technologies, 7.10.3390/technologies7010027 ↗
32. The Effects of Mobile Applications’ Passive and Interactive Loading Sc-reen Types on Waiting Experience10.1080/0144929X.2023.2224901 ↗
33. Controlled Attention Sharing Influences Time Estimation10.3758/BF03209252 ↗
34. Is Waiting a Kind of Torture? Perceived Waiting Time and the Resulting Irrational Decision Making10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01679 ↗
35. Waiting Online: A Review and Research Agenda10.1108/10662240310478213 ↗
36. User Experience Analysis of ShopeeFood Service Using Google’s HEART Framework10.34148/teknika.v14i1.1141 ↗
37. Rodden, K., Hutchinson, H., and Fu, X. (2010). Measuring the User Experience on a Large Scale: User-Centered Metrics for Web Applications. CHI ’10, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA, USA 10–15 April 2010, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/1753326.1753687 ↗
38. An Experimental Study of Customer Effort, Expectation, and Satisfaction10.1177/002224376500200303 ↗
39. Prospective and Retrospective Duration Judgments: A Meta-Analytic Review10.3758/BF03209393 ↗
40. Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 ↗
41. Lovibond, S.H., and Lovibond, P.F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, Psychology Foundation of Australia. [2nd ed.]. Psychology Foundation monograph.10.1037/t01004-000 ↗
42. Measuring Emotion: The Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 ↗
43. Hou, G., and Wang, X. (2024). Emotional Valence and Arousal: The Impact of AI-Generated Image Stimuli on Design Creativity. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ.10.1007/s10798-024-09941-2 ↗
44. Memorability Shapes Perceived Time (and Vice Versa)10.1038/s41562-024-01863-2 ↗
45. Zargham, N., Avanesi, V., Reicherts, L., Scott, A.E., Rogers, Y., and Malaka, R. (2023). “Funny How?” A Serious Look at Humor in Conversational Agents. CUI ’23, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19–21 July 2023, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3571884.3603761 ↗
46. Chen, J.Y.C., and Fragomeni, G. (2023). A Bibliometric-Based Study of Virtual Reality User Interface Design. Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-3-031-35634-6 ↗