Pagination vs. Infinite Scroll vs. Load More: Which to Choose and Why
Pagination, infinite scroll, and load more solve long lists in different ways. How to choose based on the task, the footer, and keyboard access.
What is each pattern?
- Pagination. Results are split into numbered pages, each with its own URL. It is the oldest pattern and the one that gives the most control over where the person is.
- Infinite scroll. When you reach the bottom, new content loads without any further action. There is no visible end and no numbers.
- Load more. A button at the end of the list adds the next block. The page doesn’t change, but the person decides when to continue.
Nielsen Norman Group separates these patterns by task: infinite scroll works when people want to scroll through homogeneous items, and it is not a good choice when they need to search, compare, or review the first results (NN/g, “Infinite Scrolling: When to Use It, When to Avoid It”).
Why should a designer care?
Because the choice decides things the mockup doesn’t show: whether people can return to where they were, whether they can reach the footer, whether a link to a specific page can be shared, and whether a screen reader user understands what happened.
Smashing Magazine summarizes Baymard’s 2016 review of e-commerce sites: test subjects perceived pagination as slow and explored less of the list; infinite scroll generates a lot of browsing but shallow scanning, and it can keep people from ever reaching the footer; load more lets people compare the full list because products accumulate in one list, and it keeps the footer accessible. The same article notes that over 90% of the benchmarked sites handled the back button wrongly and recommends history.pushState() to fix it (Smashing Magazine, “Infinite Scrolling, Pagination Or Load More Buttons?”).
Quick comparison
| Criterion | Pagination | Infinite scroll | Load more |
|---|---|---|---|
| Returning to the same position | Easy with the page URL | Hard; the back button often returns to the top | Possible with URL and history management |
| Reaching the footer | Yes | No, while content keeps loading | Yes |
| Sharing a specific page | Yes | No, unless the URL is managed | Depends on the implementation |
| Browsing without a goal | Less | More | In between |
| Comparing or searching | Better | Worse | In between |
| Keyboard accessibility | Predictable | Complex | Predictable if focus is managed |
This table is a rough guide based on the sources of this article. It is not a rule. A fashion catalog with visual cards and a flight search tool don’t have the same task.
What should a good implementation include?
Smashing Magazine (2022) proposes combining infinite scroll with an accessible footer, a visual separation between new and old items, a URL that updates as content loads, and a page selector (Smashing Magazine, “Infinite Scroll UX Done Right”). Those add-ons exist because the pure pattern has problems.
On accessibility there are three points to check:
- Keyboard. If new content appears without control, keyboard users have to move link by link and may never reach the footer. Smashing Magazine asks for the footer to be reachable by keyboard too.
- Announcement. Screen readers don’t always notice that new content has arrived. Smashing Magazine asks for new items to be announced.
- Focus. With load more, focus should move to the first new item. With pagination, it usually goes to the top of the page or to a heading.
Nielsen Norman Group points to the W3C ARIA feed role for lists that keep extending, because it helps people navigate the flow and lets them jump to the next focusable item. Screen reader testing is how you check that it actually works.
Example
Illustrative example: an online store uses infinite scroll on its sneaker listing. Reviewing sessions, the team sees that almost nobody reaches the customer service link in the footer, and that people who come back from a product have to hunt for the spot where they were. They switch to a visible load more button, update the URL on each load, and make the footer accessible. The team measures whether people find a specific product faster, and whether footer clicks go up.
When NOT to use each one
- Pagination: when the list is very homogeneous and people want to browse on impulse. Then it feels slow and fragmented.
- Infinite scroll: when people need to search, compare, review a history, or reach a footer with legal or contact information.
- Load more: when the content is very long and users are expected to reach the end often. It piles up buttons and can become just as tedious.
If the list is part of a purchase flow or a long form, also review form validation timing and the funnel analysis of that step.
Common mistakes
- Using infinite scroll for search results.
- Not updating the URL, so nobody can share or return to a page.
- Loading content without announcing it or moving focus.
- Hiding the footer behind continuous loading.
- Choosing the pattern by fashion instead of by task.
How to start tomorrow
Open the most important long list in your product and write down the main task of the people who use it: browsing, searching, or comparing. Check whether the footer is reachable, whether the URL changes, and whether a keyboard user can return to their place. If any answer is “no”, try load more with an updated URL, and review it with a usability test script that includes returning from a detail page.
Sources
- NN/g: Infinite Scrolling: When to Use It, When to Avoid It
- Smashing Magazine: Infinite Scrolling, Pagination Or “Load More” Buttons? Usability Findings In eCommerce
- Smashing Magazine: Infinite Scroll UX Done Right: Guidelines and Best Practices
- Google Search Central: Pagination and incremental page loading