Train your technical writers in UX writing – join our training day on October 21. Learn more.
Train your technical writers in UX writing – join our training day on October 21. Learn more.
Have a look around a few websites. Chances are that you’ll see at least a couple of “Learn more” links. While CTA links like “Learn more” are found all over websites and within apps, they don’t bolster the user experience.
CTA stands for call-to-action and refers to the prompt for users to take an action. It can be a button, a hyperlink, or even an image but the text generally denotes the action you want a user to take.
When you looked at the websites, perhaps you also saw “Read more”, “Click here”, or “More info”. These are CTA links cut of the same cloth—they’re non-descriptive or general CTAs. They are very broad and act as a kitchen sink of sorts when it comes to links.
There could be many reasons why “learn more” has become so ubiquitous. Maybe the content team is understaffed (as is often the case) and doesn’t have the time or resources to dedicate to writing descriptive CTAs. Or maybe some of the copy was written by non-writers such as developers or SMEs (subject matter experts) who aren’t sure what to write so they use one of those CTAs as a catch-all. Perhaps it’s mobile-driven as Nielsen Norman Group suggests. Whatever the reason, it’s clear that non-descriptive CTAs are pretty common these days.
“Learn more” could arguably work in any scenario as they do the job of moving the user to the next screen or page. Simply put, “learn more” is a quick and easy CTA. But as UX writers, you can craft CTAs that are more effective and provide a better user experience.
On the Royal Bank of Canada’s website in the screenshot below, there are “Learn more” CTAs for both sections. Revisions for more descriptive links that set up the appropriate context might include “Visit Careers” and “See our impact”.
Issues with non-descriptive CTAsThere are various reasons why general CTAs aren’t effective:
The same reason why “Learn more” is so omnipresent is what makes it an ineffective CTA: it’s too ambiguous and has poor information scent. It may help move the user to the next screen or page but it doesn’t help them navigate the experience. If there are multiple “Learn more” links on the page, it could cause further confusion about whether or not all the links direct to the same page.
“Learn more” doesn’t give the user enough context to move onto the next step in their journey. According to NN/G, this uncertainty can create hesitation, confusion, and ultimately cognitive strain. And as UX writers, you’re in the business of helping users do what they need to do more easily.
You want users to feel certain about what is on the other side of a CTA. Expectations need to be set because this is a case where surprises are not welcome. On the other hand, you also want to entice the user with compelling copy and persuade them that this next step will be beneficial for them. It’s an art to find a balance between the two. But if you have to choose, always opt for clarity over cleverness.
A visually-impaired person uses assistive technology like a screen reader or a magnifier to guide them through the site. Most screen-reader users will hear a list of links and don’t have the visual context to help make sense of general CTAs. If they are confused by the “learn more” CTA, they won’t
