Letting the user know that there's not much useful information found is useful information.
If you don't show the search results list in case there's only one result, you save the user some time – but I doubt the user will actually appreciate it. The user basically doesn't know whether there's only one result – or if there's an inconsistency in how the ...
Exactly, I think this particular type of pagination caused me confusions lot of times. However Its already adapted by the population.
I'ld suggest something like below
So what really happening here is -
Its clearly making Previous / Next very prominent and not causing any confusion.
In page numbers three dots (...) followed by last two page numbers ...
Do not auto-redirect user. Remember to let the user have the control on your sites. Make them the ruler of your site.
The user might also want to revise their search terms. As a user, when I tried to search for common items and got 1 result, I might feel something wrong with my search terms. I would tried to generalize the search terms.
On another case, ...
Consistency is important in UX
This is a general principle but it's especially true for consumer-facing sites where users may be new or have varying levels of familiarity.
In real life, when you open your fridge to start cooking you expect to see food inside. It's confusing and cognitively dissonant if you open your fridge a second time and see a stovetop ...
There is a question you need to answer (which can be stated in different ways):
How big is your dataset?
Is "everything" a finite set?
Is it sensible that the user might want to see everything?
If your dataset is small or finite, or it's sensible that the user would be able to deal with everything, then you could return everything.
If your dataset is ...
Pagination with select list
When there is a manageable number of pages:
Shows the current page number (selected attribute of option)
Shows the last page number after one click (could also be added next to the select list if it’s important)
Allows to jump directly to any page (including first and last)
No confusing two sets of buttons (first/last and prev/...
I did a quick check on how Google and Bing handle this and their flow is to just ignore the search request if there is no search value entered and keep the user in the same page.
While that does make sense since the user might be confused if search results are contrary to what he expected and if he gets some random results he might be confused as in his ...
TL;DR: Use a multi factor ranking system.
A good example to follow is the way that Google rank search results. We of course don't know the precise details of their ranking algorithm, but they have arguably done the most research on this and have the most success. What we do know for sure is that Google include a large number of factors and apply a ...
It also depends on the kind of search, for example if the user is searching for a customer number in a CRM. When entering that number while on the phone with a customer, the number is unique and the user expects one match. He/she will probably find the result list redundant. A partial number may return the search list for further exploration.
If the application is for providing exact items for which users may know the title, redirect to the item but provide a means to show the full search results.
Wikipedia does this if you search for an article with the exact name of your query unless you navigate to the full search results. This is useful because the user will most likely want to visit that ...
When you consider that much effort (hopefully) goes into the design of other pages on the website, it's wrong to think that the search engine results page (SERP) should receive any less love.
There are several steps at which the zero SERP can be avoided or improved.
The first point of prevention is at the query formulation using as-you-type suggestions, ...
A search should ALWAYS end up in a search result page no matter if it's a structured results or actionable results. This is standard behavior on all available search engines whether it’s online or in an application.
However, you have the possibility to display the search results in different ways, as in this example of Actionable Results Illustrated.
Moving to more human-like computer system, you could give to the system some human features:
Politeness -- don't make use blame himself of his error (this effect is described by D.Norman in The Design of Everyday Things). Just point it gently.
Forgiveness -- both computers and humans make errors. Forgive the user and he will forgive the system's error once. ...
I often type in the URL bar so that I can go directly to the page I want. An input box letting the user type the direct page would be a great boost in UX and usability.
You can make the current page number (the one that shows as active) turn contenteditable when clicked (make sure to auto-highlight) and let the user type a number and hit Enter. You can also ...
Frankly, this is contextual. For a single word, generally 2-4 letters are kept as minimum to initiate the auto complete feature. There are at least two reasons for this.
One being the performance as you pointed out. There is no need to fire up a filtering call when you know that the resultant dataset will be huge.
Second being, the number of results you ...
If you're referring to the UK postcode areas, then according to https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-addresses/ Warwick University has a single postcode of CV4 7AL which refers to 6,000 students. It also gives a French postcode of 75015, referring to 230,000 people.
Forces' BFPO numbers are a single postcode, so a single aircraft ...
You can use a Search Thesaurus, which basically is predefined synonymes stored in your search engine. So if the user search for programmer, your thesaurus should translate this to search for "developers" and "coders" as well.
The real problem here is to find out which terms your target audience use. The best option here is to look through your search ...
It is almost always better to both (a) cut out unnecessary steps, and (b) immediately show the user results of an action. Automatically filtering results when the user clicks a check box does both of these things, and having a "Filter" button does not, so the first design is better. Of course, it should also be easy for the user to undo or change the ...
The convention on search result pages is to present the actual content looking almost the same. The reason behind it is that's it easier to scan content and find keywords representing the thing the user is searching for.
Filtering search shouldn't be done in the actual result list but in a faceted navigation tool to the left of the search result listing.
For questions like this, especially around customer experience in e-commerce, I sometimes try to imagine the situation as it might occur in the brick-and-mortar world.
In an actual shop, would you ask your customers to stare at a wall until they told you what they were looking for? Of course not.
Customers want to browse.
Informing users what's going on is never wrong. Assuming that we’re within time limit (<100 ms) and do not need to do anything is always wrong.
How can you tell how long it takes for user X to download content Y from your site Z at any given moment? There must be at least 200 unknown variables here that you do not have control over. That’s the reason we ...
I think we have to be honest with users. So return NOTHING, but not just nothing! Users have nothing to do while seeing NOTHING in the search result.
Another idea is to show them why there is nothing ? Maybe they are not searching in the right place. Maybe a word is misspelled so we can correct it. Finally, maybe we are not supposed to have such contents!
Are the images themselves of any value? - placeholder or actual.
If you're dealing with a mixed-case of images and missing images, why not design for the most common denominator? Likewise from a design perspective, you're putting heavy emphasis on the image scale and placement itself - are most users more familiar with the image or title of entity?
By sandwiching options in this way the user has mental sense of their position and direction for movement. Reversing the position of the NEXT and LAST buttons would be counter-intuitive.
Each scenario is different depending on the likely actions of your users and the information you are displaying. If the search results do roll over many pages perhaps a ...
For a bilingual search, do not detect the language, just search both and return results from both searches. E.g. when typing "ma" in the autocomplete search box, you could get:
For multilingual, it wouldn't work that well, but if the search in the chosen language returns 0 hits, you could use a whole-word search in all languages ...
As has already been expressed in other answers on here, the reasons not to redirect include:
The user expects to see a results page (consistent with other search operations)
The user expects to be able to evaluate the results of the search
The user is likely to become disoriented by the page redirect and think that the search may have failed.
Google did ...
This possibly sounds like a good use case for categorised autocomplete - http://jqueryui.com/autocomplete/#categories
A single search box that splits the result into logical grouping when presented back to the user.
download bmml source – Wireframes created with Balsamiq Mockups
Hope this helps.
I don't think that there is a standard. But I like the idea of following principles of how people interact with each other and reflecting that in UI design. Sending a search request can be looked at as asking a person a question. You formulate a question and then make sure that the person hears and understands it. If you request a response without a question ...