Take the 2-minute tour ×
User Experience Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for user experience researchers and experts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In many websites, like this one or YouTube for example, after you've done a search (ex. http://ux.stackexchange.com/search?q=something) you can click an option to sort the results by a different criteria (following with the same example, you can click on Newest instead of the default Relevance) and the search is sorted by the new criteria. That's fair enough.

But, if I edit the query (ex. I replace "something" with "anything") and, without clicking on "search" (and there's no instant search here), I click on another sort criteria (ex. votes), my edited query is lost. I find this quite annoying. Shouldn't the edited query be preserved? Moreover, should the search be automatically redone with the edited query?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

There's a couple things to consider with this.

Firstly, what if the user accidentally types something into the field while it still has focus? This would create a new search, and the user would have to edit their query back and re-filter them to get back to the original results.

Secondly, immediately searching for the new typed filed could pose some more questions. For example, when does the site start the new search in relation to the user typing? If it's instant, the page will being flashing responses while the user types. If the site is accessible, it needs to have a Submit button. Typing into the textfield cannot submit the query.

A better option may be an autocomplete field that lets the user see that they've typed in something, and then they can continue typing or select an option when they're ready to submit it and have the results change.

With all that in mind, both ways are perfectly acceptable, it just depends on how the user has decided to code their site, and which factors they've deemed to be most important.

share|improve this answer
    
My question is in the context of NON-instant search. Just typing will never start a search. So, accidentally typing into the field (which I think it's very improbable and so I wouldn't optimize for this case anyway) will not trigger a new search (a new search will only be created when clicking on submit or on a filter/sort order option). As for your second point ("immediately searching for the new typed filed could pose some more questions"), I'm not asking about this case, as I'm assuming that only after clicking search or changing filter a new search will be started. –  Xavi Feb 6 at 17:10
    
Then you're considering using filters as submit buttons for a form? What about the user who starts typing something and then changes their mind and filters it? If they have no indication that these filter buttons will submit the form, they'll be very confused. –  littlekellilee Feb 6 at 23:00
    
Yes, I was considering using filters as submit buttons. Yeah, I don't like it, but I don't like the usual alternative either (i.e. to lose any edits on the search field when changing the filter). Actually, I think the usual behaviour is more frequently annoying. If I start typing to change the previous query, but then I change my mind... I wouldn't expect that clicking on a filter would do the search using the previous query, which is not even visible now (as I've edited it). Anyway, I think I'll use the common route, because the alternative doesn't convince me either. –  Xavi Feb 7 at 22:38

Users making more than one change to search/filter criteria will naturally expect the results returned to reflect all changes made and therefore the answer is YES - the search should "be automatically redone with the edited query", as you put it.

For only the second (or last) change to be reflected in the results is unexpected/unintuitive.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.