Why some calls to action (CTA’s) feel easy to ignore

Most CTAs aren’t failing because they’re being hidden. Most are failing because they do not answer everything in the head of the person reading them.

When someone clicks a button, they’ve made a relatively minor decision — not an earth-shattering decision at all. More like a split-second internal decision about if the next thing you want to do is clear enough, relevant enough, and important enough to take right then instead of later.

This is generally when the more marginal CTAs begin to fall apart.

If the language used in the CTA is too vague, it will be abstract as well. When there are multiple other things surrounding the CTA, it dilutes the moment. If the call to action tells us we need to “click” something but doesn’t give us a tangible outcome, people won’t necessarily reject it — they’ll simply continue with what they were originally going to do.

It’s often when the CTA is visually simpler (and thus less ambiguous) that the CTA works better. When the language of the CTA is more descriptive. When the design allows room for clarity. And when the next thing to do feels so clearly defined that hesitation can find little ground to grow.

In this way, many stronger CTAs may look deceptively simple. Instead of just asking for a reaction, they reduce ambiguity.

This portion was rewritten to be distinct from the original source, by creating a new form and using no direct quotes from the author, while still referencing several of his major points such as simplicity/clarity, emotional responses/choice, use of strong verb-based language, visual elements emphasizing a call to action, and aligning the call to action with user intent.