The Hamburger-Menu Icon Today: Is It Recognizable?

Few icons in digital design have sparked as much debate over the last decade as the hamburger. The hamburger menu — which earned its nickname because of its abstract, stacked, hamburger-like appearance — was originally embraced as a clever way to save space on small screens by hiding the main navigation behind a single button. While this approach decluttered the interface, it also contributed to poor usability: Users overlooked it and took longer to complete tasks on both mobile and desktop. 

Though it was a novel pattern then, today, most users recognize the hamburger menu and know what it means. Still, many of the same design risks apply. This article revisits our early hamburger-menu findings, shares research about the recognizability of the hamburger today, and offers visual-design best practices for the hamburger icon.

Then: The Hamburger Lowered Interface Usability

Back in 2015–2016, we conducted a series of qualitative and quantitative studies comparing hidden-navigation patterns (like hamburger menus) to visible, always-on navigation. The results were clear and consistent:

• Users engaged less with content hidden behind a hamburger-menu icon.
• Task success rates dropped.
• Time on task increased.
• Overall satisfaction decreased.

These issues were true on both mobile and desktop interfaces (though they were exacerbated for desktop).

Our guidance then was to make navigation visible whenever possible and to use hamburger menus sparingly — only when space constraints truly required it (and never on desktop). In addition, if a hamburger menu was used, we recommended that it follow several best practices that still hold true (and are summarized at the end of this article).

Now: The Hamburger Is a Familiar Pattern

Over the past decade, the hamburger menu — much like its namesake — has become a classic. As mobile-first design took hold, it offered a clean, space-saving solution, and when design leaders like Apple and Amazon adopted it, others followed. Its growing ubiquity helped standardize its meaning: Through repeated exposure, users learned to recognize and interpret the icon with increasing confidence.

In recent research conducted for the book Digital Icons That Work: A Comprehensive Guide to Enhancing Experience with Effective Iconography, participants were shown dozens of hamburger icons in context and asked to predict their function.

While this study didn’t measure task time or success as our previous studies did, it did assess recognizability: When users saw the icon, did they recognize it as a hidden menu?

And they did. For the most part, participants correctly identified the hamburger icon as the main menu or top-level site categories, especially when it appeared in expected locations and with standard styling (3 stacked lines of equal length).

For example, the Dick’s Sporting Goods mobile website used a typically styled hamburger icon in the standard location (the top-left corner of the screen) to contain the top-level navigation. Users had no issue interpreting this icon, even when we removed the Menu label in the screenshot shown to participants.

Dickssportinggoods.com (mobile): Participants interpreted the typically styled hamburger icon in the top-left corner as a menu, even when the Menu label was removed from the screenshot.

Even a 2-line version of the hamburger icon from the ecommerce mobile website Vivaia was correctly interpreted when placed in the expected location.

Vivaia.com (mobile): Users were confident that the 2-line version of the hamburger icon represented a main site menu.

With hamburger icons, position has a major impact on interpretation. Users generally understand the icon to mean "categories hidden here" as long as it appears in the expected spot: the top-left corner of the screen.

In our study, even small design variations with the hamburger icon didn’t cause major issues, provided the typical position was maintained.

For example, the Toms mobile website used a document-like version of the hamburger icon — three lines enclosed in a rectangular border — in the top-left corner.

Most users still correctly interpreted it as the main menu, though the border introduced minor confusion. One participant mistook it for a document, while another, initially uncertain, reasoned:

“Normally, that would be a menu item, but the fact that it’s in a square makes me think it’s something different. But the fact that I don’t see a menu elsewhere makes me think it’s the menu.”

Toms.com (mobile): One participant interpreted the border-enclosed version of the hamburger icon as a document, despite its placement in the top left-hand corner.

Newsweek’s mobile site featured a hamburger icon with an arrowhead superimposed (likely an attempt to hint at a sliding panel).

However, users ignored the added detail and still correctly predicted that the icon would reveal overall site categories. Again, the icon’s familiar placement in the top-left corner likely aided interpretation.

Newsweek.com (mobile): Users interpreted the three-line hamburger icon with a superimposed arrow in the top-left corner as a hidden menu. 

Still, such embellishments are unnecessary: Altering a familiar form can introduce doubt, even if it doesn’t completely block recognition.

The steady recognition of the hamburger icon despite slight design variations reflects something we've seen across digital interactions: Once unfamiliar patterns become second nature through repeated exposure. However, that doesn’t mean the hamburger menu is foolproof or universally understood — especially by less tech-savvy audiences or in unfamiliar layouts. 

In addition, because this study examined recognizability only, we can’t speak to whether task time or success rates for tasks involving the hamburger menu have changed over the years. (Past usability issues weren’t solely about recognizing the icon; they also involved discoverability, memorability, and overall familiarity with the pattern.)

Caution: When Familiarity Becomes Interference

The hamburger menu has become so ubiquitous that its visual form — the three stacked lines — is now deeply ingrained in users’ mental models. So much so, in fact, that icons using a similar structure can be misinterpreted as hamburger menus, even when they serve entirely different functions.

This kind of visual interference is especially common when line-based icons, such as list view or filter icons, are placed in the top-left corner of the screen — a position strongly associated with main site navigation.

For example, in the Apple Notes desktop application, a list-view icon appeared in the top-left corner, next to a gallery-view icon. Despite including bullet-like dots to differentiate it from a traditional hamburger icon, users frequently interpreted it as a navigation menu.

One participant explained:

“That’s the hamburger [icon] on the far left. It’s an expanding navigation of some sort. It would expand and showcase a list of additional menu items or features.”

Apple Notes (desktop): Many users interpreted the list-view icon in the top-left corner as a hamburger icon representing a hidden menu.

In another example, a line-based filter icon in the YouTube mobile application caused confusion. Many users interpreted it as categories or a favorites list (terms more closely tied to navigation or list views than to filtering).

Youtube.com (mobile): Many users interpreted the Search filters icon in the contextual menu at the bottom of the screen as a categories or favorites list. (Note that the Search filters label was removed in the screenshot shown to participants.)

This example shows how strongly users associate grouped lines with navigation, even when the icon is not placed in the top-left corner.

The design takeaway is to exercise caution when using line-based icons — like those for lists, filters, or content views — in positions users commonly associate with navigation. When placed in the top-left corner, especially, these icons may be mistaken for hamburger menus. In addition, make sure to label icons to support recognizability and interpretation.

Recommendations for Designing Hamburger Icons

Recent research confirms that the hamburger menu is widely recognizable: Most users interpret this icon as representing a hidden menu or list of categories. When implemented thoughtfully, it can be an effective navigation tool.

The secret sauce to usable and discoverable hamburger menus hasn’t changed. To maximize usability today and beyond, follow these best practices:

• Use the standard 3-line icon: The original 3-line hamburger icon resonates strongly with users. No need to get creative: Stick with the familiar pattern users expect.
• Place it in the top-left corner: Users consistently look to the top-left corner of the screen for hidden navigation. Positioning the menu elsewhere increases the risk of it being overlooked or misunderstood.
• Avoid extra styling or borders: Decorative elements like outlines or frames can cause users to mistake the icon for something else (like a document icon).
• Label the icon Menu: A label is especially helpful for less-experienced users or when introducing the pattern in unfamiliar contexts.
• Use subtle animation or transitions: If tapping the icon reveals a navigation panel, subtle motion cues can reinforce the interaction and guide user expectations.
• Avoid confusion with other 3-line icons: Be especially cautious about differentiating other line-based icons (like list views or filters) and avoid similar icons in the top-left corner of screens and panels.
• Scale the hamburger icon appropriately: A hamburger icon sized for a smartphone can become nearly invisible on a large desktop screen.
• Make it look clickable: Extreme flat design can obscure discoverability and limit interaction. 
• Add visual padding around the icon: Crowding the icon near headers or other UI elements reduces visibility.
• Ensure adequate contrast: Low-contrast icons blend into the background, especially for users with visual impairments.
• Provide additional navigation methods: Support the hamburger with in-line links, lists of related links, a highly visible search function, and footer links.

While these basic design principles haven’t changed, user expectations and behaviors involving the hamburger menu have.

And remember, the old guideline is still true, regardless:If you don't need to hide navigation, don’t. Even though most users now recognize the hamburger menu, hidden navigation still adds interaction cost because users have to take an extra step to access menu items. (And, remember, increased recognizability doesn’t necessarily mean that task times or success rates for hamburger-menu tasks have changed.)

Conclusion: The Updated Verdict

The hamburger menu is now a familiar, recognizable pattern.

But familiarity alone doesn’t erase its fundamental tradeoffs. Hiding navigation always introduces an interaction cost, because users must take an extra step to access key options, and important content remains out of sight.

When used thoughtfully — especially on space-constrained screens — the hamburger menu can be effective. Familiar design, consistent placement, and adherence to best practices remain critical.

The verdict: Hamburger menus are viable, but not universal. Use them wisely, follow best practices, consider its tradeoffs, and always test it (and other icons) with users to ensure it truly serves their needs.

Further Reading

Explore the following resources for context on the evolution of the hamburger menu icon and icon usability: 

• Hidden Navigation Hurts UX Metrics
• Hamburger Menu Research Methodology
• Beyond the Hamburger: How to Make Navigation Discoverable on Desktops 
• Icon Usability: When and How to Evaluate Digital Icons 
• Digital Icons That Work: A Comprehensive Guide to Enhancing Experience with Effective Iconography (book)