Grouping related content into clear sections

When a page feels overwhelming or disorganised, it's rarely because the information is wrong. It's usually because the information isn't grouped in a way that reflects how people read, think, or act.

Why grouping matters

People don't read web pages in a straight line. They skim. They scroll. They stop only when they find something that feels relevant. Without clear sections, users are left guessing: "Is this part still about eligibility?" "Where do the referral steps begin?" "Wasn't this already mentioned earlier?"

Poor grouping forces people to work harder than they should. Clear grouping reduces that effort and improves trust, clarity, and accessibility.

Good content grouping helps users stay oriented and find what they need efficiently, reduces cognitive load by presenting information in logical chunks, improves accessibility for screen reader users navigating by headings, and supports search engines in understanding content structure and relevance.

The goal isn't just organising information visually - it's organising information conceptually in ways that match how people think about and use your content.

What grouping actually means

Grouping creates self-contained, meaningful blocks of content - each with a clear purpose and boundary. A well-grouped section typically includes a heading that clearly identifies the topic, related body content that fully addresses that topic, logical flow from the section before it, and clear transition to the next section.

Consider this effective structure:

Heading: Eligibility for the ABC Study
Body: Age and health requirements
Supporting details: Specific criteria, screening process

Next Heading: How to enroll
Body: Step-by-step instructions, contact form

Users never feel lost. Each section feels complete before the next begins, and someone scanning headings can understand the page's full scope and organisation.

The problem with splitting content across multiple pages

It's tempting to "tidy up" content by dividing it across separate pages - one for eligibility, another for referral, another for timelines. This may seem organised, but from a user experience perspective, it introduces unnecessary friction.

Every click becomes a decision point, every page load creates delay, and every change in layout requires new adjustment. People often abandon multi-page processes when they could successfully navigate longer single pages with clear sections.

From a search engine perspective, splitting related content can hurt performance. Individual pages may lack sufficient context to rank well, pages may compete with each other for the same search terms, and instead of one strong, comprehensive page, you end up with several weak ones that don't provide complete information.

Unless your content genuinely needs separation - distinct audiences, different workflows, or compliance requirements - it's almost always better to group related content into well-structured sections on a single page.

Matching user mental models

Effective grouping reflects how people naturally think about information rather than how organisations internally categorise it. Most users approach content with questions like: "What is this?" "Who is it for?" "How do I get started?" "What does it involve?" "Who can I contact?"

Organise content around these natural question patterns rather than administrative divisions. Users don't care whether research recruitment is handled by one team and data collection by another - they want information that flows logically through their decision-making process.

For a medical research organisation, this might mean grouping study information around user questions like "Am I eligible?" "What happens during the study?" and "How do I participate?" rather than internal categories like "Recruitment protocols," "Data collection procedures," and "Administrative requirements."

This user-centred approach also supports search engine optimisation because it matches how people search for information. Someone researching childhood autism studies might search for everything from basic eligibility to specific procedures in a single session, expecting to find comprehensive information together.

Creating logical section boundaries

Effective sections have clear beginnings and endings that help users understand when they've finished one topic and moved to another. Use specific headings that identify topics clearly rather than vague labels like "More information" or "Other details."

Each section should answer a distinct question completely before moving to the next topic. Avoid scattering related information across multiple sections or cramming unrelated topics together under single headings.

The goal is creating content that works well when accessed linearly (reading straight through) and when accessed randomly (jumping to specific sections via navigation or search).

Common organisational patterns

Process-based organisation works well for instructional content: "Before you start," "During the process," "After completion." This matches how people think about multi-step activities and provides clear progression.

Question-based organisation serves information-seeking users effectively: "Who can apply," "What it costs," "How long it takes." This directly addresses common user concerns and supports natural search patterns.

Feature-based organisation helps with comparison decisions: "Individual therapy," "Group programs," "Assessment services." This structure works when users need to understand options and make choices between them.

Choose organisational patterns based on your primary user goals and the type of decisions your content supports, not just internal administrative convenience.

Testing and refinement

Audit your content grouping by reading only the headings to see whether they tell a complete story, checking whether someone could understand the page structure from headings alone, and identifying obvious gaps or logical jumps between sections.

Look for warning signs like long paragraphs covering multiple topics, vague headings that don't clearly identify content, related ideas scattered across different sections, and no clear progression through the page.

Ask whether someone stressed, hurried, or unfamiliar with your topic could quickly find what they need. If your grouping requires extensive knowledge of your organisation or services to navigate effectively, it probably needs improvement.

Test with real users when possible, or simulate different access methods by reading content linearly, navigating by headings only, and searching for specific information to ensure your grouping supports multiple user approaches.

Implementation considerations

Plan content organisation before writing detailed text. Rough outlines with clear section topics often reveal organisational problems that become harder to fix after content is fully developed.

Consider how your grouping will work on mobile devices where users might see only one section at a time. Each section should provide enough context to be useful independently while still contributing to the overall page goals.

Remember that good grouping serves multiple purposes simultaneously - user navigation, accessibility, search optimisation, and content maintenance all benefit from clear, logical organisation that reflects actual user needs and behaviors.

Check your understanding

Copy and paste this to ChatGPT when you're ready for feedback:

I've been completing some questions that have been presented to me as part of an SEO course. I'm currently answering questions for a section titled "Grouping related content into clear sections". Please check my answers and let me know if I've understood the key ideas correctly. My responses are below.

1. Your organisation's leadership argues that splitting content across multiple pages makes the website "cleaner and more professional" because individual pages are shorter and less overwhelming. Using examples from the lesson, analyse why this approach might actually create more problems for users and search engines than keeping related content together in well-organised sections.

2. Which of the following best demonstrates user-centred content grouping?

• Organising content around internal team responsibilities (recruitment team, data collection team, analysis team)
• Grouping information by administrative convenience (all forms together, all policies together, all contact details together)
• Structuring content around user questions and decision-making processes (eligibility, participation experience, next steps)
• Arranging sections by order of organisational importance (leadership priorities first, operational details last)

3. You're redesigning a research study page that currently mixes eligibility criteria, study procedures, time commitments, participant benefits, and contact information throughout several long paragraphs. A colleague suggests simply adding subheadings to the existing content rather than restructuring it, arguing this would be "faster and achieve the same result." Evaluate this approach and explain why proper content grouping requires more than just adding headings to existing text.

4. Consider this scenario: Your analytics show that users frequently abandon a comprehensive service page after viewing it for less than 30 seconds, despite the page containing all the information they're likely seeking. The page has proper headings and clear writing, but covers eligibility, assessment process, treatment options, costs, and scheduling in what your team considers logical order. Analyse what grouping issues might be causing this behaviour and propose a restructuring approach that addresses user mental models rather than organisational logic.

5. A stakeholder argues that your proposed content grouping "doesn't match how we actually deliver services" and suggests organising content around internal workflows instead of user questions. They're concerned that user-centred grouping might "confuse staff who need to reference these pages for their work." How would you balance these competing needs while maintaining user-focused content organisation?