Skip to main content
loser

Product: Product Page

Hypothesis

If we test a similar change on our product pages as rejected, we should be cautious

FormProduct PageE-commerceindustry_leakamazonloser

Test Results

Key Learning

Problem: Users arriving at the product can't efficiently find what they're looking for, increasing bounce rates.

What was tried: rejected this UI change (Dec 6, 2023). Rejection suggests the change underperformed the control

Why it failed: The control was closer to optimal for this audience. Test more conservative variations next time.

How to Apply This to Your Site

This test showed that product: product page hurt conversions. The change was tested on a product page page in the e-commerce industry. Avoid replicating this exact approach — instead, consider testing the opposite direction or a more subtle variation.

Before you test: Consider that form tests typically require adequate traffic to reach statistical significance. Run your test for at least 2 full business cycles to account for weekly traffic patterns.

What Was Tested

Here is a little surprise from . A few years back, they a/b tested the addition of product details at the top of their product detail pages. Building on this, two months ago someone on their team tried to format these descriptions as inline or flowing text instead of relying on indent alignments (table-like formats).

Methodology

Confidence Level
70%

Build On These Learnings

Save your own experiments, spot winning patterns across your test history, and stop repeating what's already been tried.

Related Experiments

Explore More Experiments