On the Same Page? What Users Benefit from a Desktop View on Mobile Devices

References

• Adipat B, Zhang D, Zhou L (2011) The effects of tree-view based presentation adaptation on mobile web browsing. MIS Quart. 35(1):99–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Advit A (2020) How to view full desktop site on Chrome Android phone? BrowserHow. Accessed May 10, 2021, https://browserhow.com/how-to-view-full-desktop-site-on-chrome-android-phone/.Google Scholar
• Aschenbrenner KM (1978) Single-peaked risk preferences and their dependability on the gambles’ presentation mode. J. Experiment. Psych. Human Perception Performance 4(3):513–520.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bang Y, Lee D-J, Han K, Hwang M, Ahn J-H (2013) Channel capabilities, product characteristics, and the impacts of mobile channel introduction. J. Management Inform. Systems 30(2):101–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Muraven M, Tice DM (1998) Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 74(5):1252–1265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman JR, Kakkar P (1977) Effects of information presentation format on consumer information acquisition strategies. J. Consumer Res. 3(4):233–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman JR, Zins MA (1979) Information format and choice task effects in decision making. J. Consumer Res. 6(2):141–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman JR, Johnson EJ, Payne JW (1990) A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 45(1):111–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burtch G, Hong YK (2014) What happens when word of mouth goes mobile? Myers MD, Straub DW, eds. Proc. 35th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems).Google Scholar
• Cerdan L, Daher G (2020) Mobile search UX: Best practices for in app search design. Algolia. Accessed April 4, 2021, https://resources.algolia.com/blog-posts/mobile-search-ux-best-practices-for-in-app-search-design.Google Scholar
• Chae M, Kim J (2004) Do size and structure matter to mobile users? An empirical study of the effects of screen size, information structure, and task complexity on user activities with standard web phones. Behav. Inform. Tech. 23(3):165–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charlton G (2015) 19 must-have features for mobile product pages. Econsultancy. Accessed April 4, 2021, https://econsultancy.com/19-must-have-features-for-mobile-product-pages/.Google Scholar
• Chen X, Gu X, Xu J (2014) The analysis of information architecture in mobile web design. J. Networks 9(10):2734–2742.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi JH, Lee H-J (2012) Facets of simplicity for the smartphone interface: A structural model. Internat. J. Human Comput. Stud. 70(2):129–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chu PC, Spires EE (2000) The joint effects of effort and quality on decision strategy choice with computerized decision aids. Decision Sci. 31(2):259–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Creyer EH, Ross WTJ (1997) Tradeoffs between price and quality: How a value index affects preference formation. J. Consumer Affairs 31(2):280–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Creyer EH, Bettman JR, Payne JW (1990) The impact of accuracy and effort feedback and goals on adaptive decision behavior. J. Behav. Decision Making 3(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dillemuth JA (2009) Navigation tasks with small-display maps: The sum of the parts does not equal the whole. Cartographica 44(3):187–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Downs J (2019) Guide to list UI design: Principles and examples. Justinmind. Accessed April 4, 2021, https://www.justinmind.com/blog/list-ui-design/.Google Scholar
• Einhorn HJ, Hogarth RM (1981) Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgment and choice. Annual Rev. Psych. 32:53–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fennema MG, Kleinmuntz DN (1995) Anticipations of effort and accuracy in multiattribute choice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 63(1):21–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Findlater L, McGrenere J (2008) Impact of screen size on performance, awareness, and user satisfaction with adaptive graphical user interfaces. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (CHI 2008) (Association for Computing Machinery, New York) 1247–1256.Google Scholar
• Fling B (2009) Mobile Design and Development (O'Reilly, Sebastopol, CA).Google Scholar
• Ghose A (2017) Tap: Unlocking the Mobile Economy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Goldfarb A, Han SP (2013) How is the mobile internet different? Search costs and local activities. Inform. Systems Res. 24(3):613–631.Link, Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer G (2004) Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality. Koehler DJ, Harvey N, eds. Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA), 62–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Häubl G, Trifts V (2000) Consumer decision making in online shopping environments: The effects of interactive decision aids. Marketing Sci. 19(1):4–21.Link, Google Scholar
• Hess TJ, Fuller MA, Mathew J (2005) Involvement and decision-making performance with a decision aid: The influence of social multimedia, gender, and playfulness. J. Management Inform. Systems 22(3):15–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoehle H, Venkatesh V (2015) Mobile application usability: Conceptualization and instrument development. MIS Quart. 39(2):435–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoivik J (2013) Global village: Mobile access to library resources. Library Hi Tech 31(3):467–477.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong W, Thong JYL, Tam KY (2004) The effects of information format and shopping task on consumers’ online shopping behavior: A cognitive fit perspective. J. Management Inform. Systems 21(3):149–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hugo R (2020) Product list UX: The number of products to load by default (52% get it wrong). Baymard Institute. Accessed April 4, 2021, https://baymard.com/blog/number-of-items-loaded-by-deafult.Google Scholar
• Jacoby J, Speller DE, Kohn CA (1974) Brand choice behavior as a function of information load. J. Marketing Res. 11(1):63–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S (1989) The effect of task demands and graphical format on information processing strategies. Management Sci. 35(3):285–303.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Punj GN (2010) The effects of attribute concreteness and prominence on selective processing, choice, and search experience. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 38:471–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jogoo P, Golamgous IS, Chuttur Y (2019) From desktop to mobile view: A simplified approach to mobile website development. Proc. 2019 Conf. Next Generation Comput. Appl. (NextComp) (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Johnson EJ, Payne JW (1985) Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Sci. 31(4):395–414.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones M, Buchanan G, Thimbleby H (2003) Improving web search on small screen devices. Interacting Comput. 15(4):479–495.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung J, Bapna R, Ramaprasad J, Umyarov A (2019) Love unshackled: Identifying the effect of mobile app adoption in online dating. MIS Quart. 43(1):47–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (1973) Attention and Effort (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Kardys D (2014) Wayfinding for the mobile web. Smashing Magazine (October 13), https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2014/10/wayfinding-for-the-mobile-web/.Google Scholar
• Keller KL, Staelin R (1987) Effects of quality and quantity of information on decision effectiveness. J. Consumer Res. 14(2):200–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim H, Kim J, Lee Y (2005) An empirical study of use contexts in the mobile internet, focusing on the usability of information architecture. Inform. Systems Frontiers 7(2):175–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim KJ, Sundar SS, Park E (2011) The effects of screen-size and communication modality on psychology of mobile device users. Begole B (chair), Kellogg WA (chair), eds. CHI '11 Extended Abstr. Human Factors Comput. Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York).Google Scholar
• Kreiner H, Gamliel E (2017) Are highly numerate individuals invulnerable to attribute framing bias? Comparing numerically and graphically represented attribute framing. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 47(6):775–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lambert AD, Miller AL (2015) Living with smartphones: Does completion device affect survey responses? Res. Higher Ed. 56(2):166–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee D, Gopal A (2016) “When push comes to shop”: On identifying the effects of push notifications on mobile retail sales. Proc. 37th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems).Google Scholar
• Lee D, Gopal A, Park S-H (2020) Different but equal? A field experiment on the impact of recommendation systems on mobile and personal computer channels in retail. Inform. Systems Res. 31(3):892–912.Link, Google Scholar
• Lee D, Moon J, Kim YJ, Yi MY (2015) Antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usability: Linking simplicity and interactivity to satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. Inform. Management 52(3):295–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee YE, Benbasat I (2003) Interface design for mobile commerce. Comm. ACM 46(12):49–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee YE, Benbasat I (2011) The influence of trade-off difficulty caused by preference elicitation methods on user acceptance of recommendation agents across loss and gain conditions. Inform. Systems Res. 22(4):867–884.Link, Google Scholar
• Luck SJ, Vogel EK (1997) The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature 390(6657):279–281.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lurie NH, Song D-H, Narasimhan S (2010) Decision making on the small screen: Adaptive behavior in constrained information environments. Campbell MC, Inman J, Pieters R, eds. NA—Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 37 (Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN), 459–460.Google Scholar
• Lurie NH, Berger J, Chen Z, Li B, Liu H, Mason CH, Muir DM, Packard G, Pancras J, Schlosser AE, Sun B, Venkatesan R (2018) Everywhere and at all times: Mobility, consumer decision-making, and choice. Customer Needs Solutions 5(1-2):15–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Majchrzak A, Malhotra A, John R (2005) Perceived individual collaboration know-how development through information technology-enabled contextualization: Evidence from distributed teams. Inform. Systems Res. 16(1):9–27.Link, Google Scholar
• Malhotra NK (1982) Information load and consumer decision making. J. Consumer Res. 8(4):419–430.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maniar N, Bennett E, Hand S, Allan G (2008) The effect of mobile phone screen size on video based learning. J. Software 3(4):51–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marcotte E (2011) Responsive Web Design (A Book Apart, New York).Google Scholar
• McVicar E (2012) Designing for mobile, Part 1: Information architecture. UX Booth. Accessed May 31, 2020, https://www.uxbooth.com/articles/designing-for-mobile-part-1-information-architecture/.Google Scholar
• Melumad S, Inman JJ, Pham MT (2019) Selectively emotional: How smartphone use changes user-generated content. J. Marketing Res. 56(2):259–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mertens S, Hahnel UJJ, Brosch T (2020) This way, please: Uncovering the directional effects of attribute translations on decision making. Judgment Decision Making 15(1):25–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller GA (1956) The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psych. Rev. 63(2):81–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milord JT, Perry RP (1977) A methodological study of overload. J. General Psych. 97(1):131–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Napoli PM, Obar JA (2014) The emerging mobile internet underclass: A critique of mobile internet access. Inform. Soc. 30(5):323–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nogueira TC, Ferreira DJ, de Carvalho ST, de Oliveira Berretta L, Guntijo MR (2019) Comparing sighted and blind users task performance in responsive and non-responsive web design. Knowledge Inform. Systems 58(2):319–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW (1976) Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 16(2):366–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW (1982) Contingent decision behavior. Psych. Bull. 92(2):382–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR (2004) Walking with the scarecrow: The information-processing approach to decision research. Koehler DJ, Harvey N, eds. Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA), 110–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Braunstein ML (1971) Preferences among gambles with equal underlying distributions. J. Experiment. Psych. 87(1):13–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ (1988) Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 14(3):534–552.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ (1993) The Adaptive Decision Maker (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piccoli G, Ott M (2014) Impact of mobility and timing on user-generated content. MIS Quart. Executive 13(3):147–157.Google Scholar
• Pousttchi K, Tilson D, Lyytinen K, Hufenbach Y (2015) Mobile commerce research yesterday, today, tomorrow—what remains to be done? Internat. J. Electronic Commerce 19(4):1–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ransbotham S, Lurie NH, Liu H (2019) Creation and consumption of mobile word of mouth: How are mobile reviews different? Marketing Sci. 38(5):773–792.Link, Google Scholar
• Raphaeli O, Goldstein A, Fink L (2017) Analyzing online consumer behavior in mobile and PC devices: A novel web usage mining approach. Electronic Commerce Res. Appl. 26:1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raptis D, Tselios N, Kjeldskov J, Skov M (2013) Does size matter? Investigating the impact of mobile phone screen size on users’ perceived usability, effectiveness and efficiency. Ashbrook D (chair), Rukzio E (chair), eds. Proc. 15th Internat. Conf. Human-Comput. Interaction Mobile Devices Services (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 127–136.Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Torrico P, San José Cabezudo R, San-Martín S (2017) Tell me what they are like and I will tell you where they buy. An analysis of omnichannel consumer behavior. Comput. Human Behav. 68:465–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roudaki A, Kong J, Yu N (2015) A classification of web browsing on mobile devices. J. Visual Language Comput. 26:82–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russo JE, Dosher BA (1983) Strategies for multiattribute binary choice. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 9(4):676–696.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schkade DA, Kleinmuntz DN (1994) Information displays and choice processes: Differential effects of organization, form, and sequence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 57(3):319–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schlick C, Ziefle M, Park M, Luczak H (2009) Visual display. Sears A, Jacko JA, eds. Human-Computer Interaction: Fundamentals (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL), 177–203.Google Scholar
• Shah AK, Oppenheimer DM (2008) Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction framework. Psych. Bull. 134(2):207–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shugan SM (1980) The cost of thinking. J. Consumer Res. 7(2):99–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1956) Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psych. Rev. 63(2):129–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1979) Rational decision making in business organizations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 69(4):493–513.Google Scholar
• Singh RI, Sumeeth M, Miller J (2011) Evaluating the readability of privacy policies in mobile environments. Internat. J. Mobile Human Comput. Interaction 3(1):55–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slovic P (1972) From Shakespeare to Simon: Speculation—and Some Evidence—About Man’s Ability to Process Information (Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR).Google Scholar
• Stone DN, Schkade DA (1991) Numeric and linguistic information representation in multiattribute choice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 49(1):42–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swaminathan V (2003) The impact of recommendation agents on consumer evaluation and choice: The moderating role of category risk, product complexity, and consumer knowledge. J. Consumer Psych. 13(1-2):93–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sweeney S, Crestani F (2006) Effective search results summary size and device screen size: Is there a relationship? Inform. Process. Management 42(4):1056–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sweller J (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Sci. 12(2):257–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas EA (1983) Notes on effort and achievement-oriented behavior. Psych. Rev. 90(1):1–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Todd P, Benbasat I (1994) The influence of decision aids on choice strategies: An experimental analysis of the role of cognitive effort. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 60(1):36–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toms EG (2002) Information interaction: Providing a framework for information architecture. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 53(10):855–862.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Unadkat J (2020) How to request a desktop site on the iPhone. BrowserStack. Accessed May 10, 2021, https://www.browserstack.com/guide/request-desktop-site-on-iphone.Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Ramesh V (2006) Web and wireless site usability: Understanding differences and modeling use. MIS Quart. 30(1):181–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vessey I (1994) The effect of information presentation on decision making: A cost-benefit analysis. Inform. Management 27(2):103–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang RJH, Malthouse EC, Krishnamurthi L (2015) On the go: How mobile shopping affects customer purchase behavior. J. Retailing 91(2):217–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu JD, Benbasat I, Cenfetelli RT (2014) The nature and consequences of trade-off transparency in the context of recommendation agents. MIS Quart. 38(2):379–406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu K, Chan J, Ghose A, Han SP (2017) Battle of the channels: The impact of tablets on digital commerce. Management Sci. 63(5):1469–1492.Link, Google Scholar