The Internet Isn’t a Global Village. Culture and Differences in Website Design

The digital promised land where borders crumble, distance disappears, and everyone sees the same pixelated world. For decades, we’ve been sold this vision of a culturally neutral cyberspace, a flat digital plain where design universalism reigns supreme. It’s a lovely thought. It’s also not totally correct.

Here’s the reality: the internet, while globally accessible, is far from culturally neutral. The tools themselves might be, sure, but the people wielding them? The ones designing the sites, the ones clicking around looking for cat videos or commercial goods? They’re steeped in culture, and that shapes everything. Communication, whether it’s face-to-face or mediated by a screen, is linked to culture; they influence each other. So, the idea that you can slap up a single website and expect it to resonate equally with users in Seoul and Seattle? It’s not just naive, it’s expensive ignorance.

Pixels Don’t Speak English (Or Korean, Or Chinese) – Culture Does

Companies spend fortunes on branding, on crafting messages that speak to a specific audience in their local market. They understand that what works in Iowa might bomb in Ireland. But when it comes to the digital realm, suddenly everyone’s a global citizen? Please. Website design and content aren’t universal. They reflect the cultural distinctiveness of their home countries.

Studies comparing websites across different cultures have shown significant differences. Not always, and not on everything – the picture is, frankly, inconclusive if you look across the board. Some studies find similarities, some find design differences but not content, others find both. But when you look at cultures that are really different, like the United States and the People’s Republic of China, or South Korea and the UK, the distinctions become more pronounced…conclusive.

Why? Because cultural values show up in the digital paint and code. Websites designed with cultural elements in mind are expected to directly influence how a user interacts with the site. When a site is “localized,” meaning adapted to a particular language, culture, and local “look and feel,” users are more likely to stick around. This means considering things like currency, yes, but also color sensitivities, images, gender roles, and geographic examples.

Comparisons between US and South Korean brand websites found differences, like South Korean sites offering links to digitized TV commercials, which US sites didn’t do. Another study noted American brand sites were more “informative,” a trait linked to the US low-context communication style. What’s low-context communication? It’s direct, explicit, with meaning conveyed mainly in the message itself. High-context communication, prevalent in places like China, is more indirect and ambiguous, relying heavily on context. So, you might expect websites from low-context cultures to dump a ton of explicit information on you, assuming more is better communication.

And it’s not just content quantity. Visual design matters. Studies comparing South Korean and UK charity websites found differences, particularly in the much more liberal use of sound, video, and animation on South Korean sites. While this could have been influenced by technology differences, it also points to different design preferences. Content analyses comparing US and Chinese websites have identified major differences across categories, finding the greatest differences between these two countries. Elements like layout, navigation, symbols, content structure, links, multimedia, and color all show cultural markers.

Think about navigation structure, the application of graphical elements and their content, and the use of language. Preferences for orientation and layout structures vary across cultures. The use of symbols, graphics, color preferences, site features like links, maps, search functions, and page layout all show significant modal differences when compared across countries like Germany, Japan, and the U.S. Specific studies on color and human images have also noted cultural differences.

The argument that the web is not a culturally neutral medium is compelling. Local cultural elements are a crucial part of web design, and multinational companies are actively adapting their web content to meet local expectations. This isn’t about checking a box; it’s about effective communication and market penetration.

How Culture Shapes Website Navigation

But design is only half the equation. The other half is the user. How does culture affect how people use websites? Turns out, it matters here too. A user’s cultural background influences their perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors online. Different user preferences for web features, navigation, security, and product information have been reported across countries.

Let’s consider the navigation patterns themselves. Studies using web server logfiles have found that cultural background has a strong influence on information retrieval patterns. Researchers exploring navigation behavior based on cultural dimensions like long-term orientation, uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede), and mono-/polychronicity (Hall) found that users’ cultural backgrounds impacted their navigation patterns in terms of time spent, amount of information accessed, and the linearity of their path.

Temporal orientation, for example, plays a role. People in collectivistic, high-context cultures often have a polychronic time orientation, meaning they’re comfortable multitasking and processing multiple streams of information simultaneously. Users from individualist, low-context cultures tend to be more monochronic, preferring to focus on one task at a time. This cultural difference can influence how users interact with complex websites featuring lots of animated graphics, videos, and text all at once. Designers in South Korea and the U.S. seem to utilize interactive features in ways consistent with their audiences’ time-management preferences.

Communication context also links back to navigation and perception. High-context communication is associated with visual formats and richer media, while low-context communication is associated with textual formats. This can influence how users seek and process information on a site.

Beyond navigation mechanics, cultural background affects broader online behavior. Users in Asian countries like Hong Kong might prefer using the internet for social communication and hobbies, while those in the United States lean more towards product information, search, and e-commerce. Users from collectivistic cultures are more likely to use the internet to extend offline relationships, contrasting with individualistic cultures where online and offline social worlds might remain separate. Online gatherings, like South Korea’s “Beongae” meetings (flash meetings), are a salient social phenomenon reflecting this collectivistic online behavior.

Image: A world of culturally influenced websites

Trust is another crucial factor influenced by culture. Lack of trust is a major reason consumers hesitate to buy online. Online trust is consumer confidence in the website and a willingness to rely on the seller, even when it makes the consumer vulnerable. Disposition to trust is a general inclination shaped by socialization, and it’s especially influential when a user hasn’t had extensive personal interaction with the vendor. This disposition is tied to national culture, often analyzed through frameworks like Hofstede’s dimensions. Different cultural groups might react differently to website color schemes, impacting trust and satisfaction. Uncertainty avoidance, for instance, can influence how important users in different cultures find information content and design elements for evaluating products or services on a website. More explicit details published about donors and donation usage on South Korean charity sites, for example, might be explained by South Korea’s strong uncertainty avoidance culture, where individuals seek guidance and try to avoid ambiguous situations.

All of this points to the idea that users from different cultures approach and perceive websites differently. They have varying preferences for design features, navigation strategies, and even what makes a website trustworthy.

The Stakes: Why You Can’t Afford to Be Culturally Tone-Deaf Online

So, what’s the bottom line for businesses and web developers? Ignoring culture online is a terrible idea.

The rise of internet usage in non-English speaking countries, with phenomenal growth in places like Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, means companies targeting global markets absolutely cannot afford to ignore the cultural impact on website design. Website localization isn’t just good practice; it’s essential for e-business success. Failing to account for cultural traits can lead to misunderstandings and inaccurate perceptions globally.

Multinationals are already getting this, adapting their web content to local cultures. Research provides a compelling case for culturally adapting content to meet online user expectations. Effective website design engages and attracts online consumers. A website must be designed for a targeted customer segment, and local adaptation needs to be based on a thorough understanding of that group’s culture.

This isn’t just about language translation. It’s about embedding cultural values and markers into the site’s design and content. These cultural markers, whether in colors, graphics, layout, or multimedia, create a country-specific “look and feel”. Users prefer and find it easier to navigate sites that feel familiar to their cultural group.

Adopting a regional strategy where websites reflect the preferences of users in various geographic markets is a good option. This requires an integrated approach to managing digital properties globally. For cultures high in power distance and high-context communication, cultural recognition is particularly important. These users are often motivated by external, social needs like affiliation and status. Website design for these cultures might need to emphasize images, symbols, and context to appeal to the local audience.

While the sources suggest that the web isn’t a progenitor of a cyber lingua franca, a truly universal online language or culture, it’s also not entirely culture-specific. There’s a concept called “cultural hybridisation” or “glocalization,” where local communities adapt to global forces, incorporating imported cultural values into their own ways of doing things. Differences between American and Chinese websites, for example, could be seen as local adaptations to globalized communication. This implies that while tools are used in culturally specific ways domestically, there’s also a blend happening. The internet is less of a melting pot and more of a global bazaar, where local flavors mingle but distinct cultural stalls remain.

The Messy Reality and Where We Go From Here

It’s not simple. As mentioned, the evidence on cultural influence isn’t always clear-cut. Studies comparing countries that are economically and politically similar might not show huge differences. Confounding variables, like geographic proximity or shared economic systems, can cloud the picture in cross-cultural studies.

Also, it’s important to remember that national culture isn’t the only factor. Individual value differences exist within countries. And technology itself plays a role. What was feasible or popular in terms of design years ago might be different now due to advancements in bandwidth and devices. Fast internet speeds might make heavy multimedia less of a hurdle than they once were, especially in places where dial-up or slow connections were common. 

The Takeaway

While technology provides a common platform, human culture ensures that the digital landscape is as varied and complex as the physical world. Companies that want to succeed online, particularly on a global scale, need to adjust to this reality.

Website design isn’t just about aesthetics or even universal usability; it’s about communication, and communication is cultural. Understanding the cultural nuances of your target audience – how they process information, what visuals resonate, what navigation feels intuitive, what builds trust – is super important.

The web is not a culturally neutral medium. It’s a collection of culturally shaped experiences. Adapt, localize, and respect the culture of your users. It’s the smart thing to do.

Bibliography 

Ahmed, T., Mouratidis, H., & Preston, D. (2009). Website design guidelines: high power distance and high context culture. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education, 2(1), 47-60.

Cyr, D. (2013). Website design, trust and culture: An eight country investigation. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(6), 373-385.

Cyr, D., Head, M., & Larios, H. (2010). Colour appeal in website design within and across cultures: A multi-method evaluation. International journal of human-computer studies, 68(1-2), 1-21.

Hsieh, H. C. L., Chen, C. H., & Hong, S. D. (2013). Incorporating culture in website design: A comparison of Taiwanese and Australian website characteristics. In Cross-Cultural Design. Cultural Differences in Everyday Life: 5th International Conference, CCD 2013, Held as Part of HCI International 2013, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 21-26, 2013, Proceedings, Part II 5 (pp. 393-403). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Kim, H., Coyle, J. R., & Gould, S. J. (2009). Collectivist and individualist influences on website design in South Korea and the US: A cross-cultural content analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(3), 581-601.

Kim, I., & Kuljis, J. (2010). Manifestations of culture in website design. Journal of computing and information technology, 18(2), 125-132.

Kralisch, A., Eisend, M., & Berendt, B. (2005, July). The impact of culture on website navigation behaviour. In Proc. HCI-International (pp. 1-9).

Moura, F. T., Singh, N., & Chun, W. (2016). THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURE IN WEBSITE DESIGN AND USERS’PERCEPTIONS: THREE SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 17(4), 312-339.

Mushtaha, A., & De Troyer, O. (2009). Cross-culture and website design: cultural movements and settled cultural variables. In Internationalization, Design and Global Development: Third International Conference, IDGD 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, 2009. Proceedings 3 (pp. 69-78). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Vitols, G., & Vitols-Hirata, Y. (2018, March). Impact of Culture Dimensions Model on Cross-Cultural Website Development. In ICEIS (2) (pp. 540-546).

Zhao, W., Massey, B., Murphy, J., & Fang, L. (2003). Cultural dimensions of website design and content. Prometheus, 21(1), 74-84.