How does knowing what you are looking for change visual search behavior?

When searching a display, users sometimes know what the target is but sometimes do not. It has generally been assumed that for this latter case people must engage in a deeper semantic evaluation of items during the search process. This idea is central to Information Foraging theory. But do people actually spend longer assessing items when engaged in a semantically demanding search task' We investigate this by having participants locate target items in 16-item menus. Participants were either told exactly what to look for (known-item search) or they were told the category that the target belonged to (semantic search). Participants were faster and more accurate at known-item searches. Eye-movement data show that this was because participants were more likely to skip over items when performing known-item searches. Contrary to expectation, we found limited empirical evidence to support the idea that deeper semantic evaluations of items lead to longer gaze durations (this occurred only when items were arranged very close together). This finding is important because it reveals how people adopt different eye gaze strategies depending on the kind of search activity they are engaged in.

[1]  Trey Hedden,et al.  Category norms as a function of culture and age: comparisons of item responses to 105 categories by american and chinese adults. , 2004, Psychology and aging.

[2]  James N. MacGregor,et al.  Minimizing User Search Time in Menu Retrieval Systems , 1985 .

[3]  Brad Mehlenbacher,et al.  Finding Information on a Menu: Linking Menu Organization to the User's Goals , 1989, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[4]  Anthony J. Hornof,et al.  Cognitive Strategies for the Visual Search of Hierarchical Computer Displays , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[5]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Eye Movements Do Not Reflect Retrieval Processes , 2004, Psychological science.

[6]  Anne Aula,et al.  How does search behavior change as search becomes more difficult? , 2010, CHI.

[7]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  ACT-R/PM and menu selection: applying a cognitive architecture to HCI , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[8]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  Model of visual search and selection time in linear menus , 2014, CHI.

[9]  Andrew Howes,et al.  Strategies for Guiding Interactive Search: An Empirical Investigation Into the Consequences of Label Relevance for Assessment and Selection , 2008, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  James E. McDonald,et al.  Searching for Items in Menus: The Effects of Organization and Type of Target , 1983 .

[11]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A predictive model of menu performance , 2007, CHI.

[12]  Richard M. Young Rational Analysis of Exploratory Choice , 2001 .

[13]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  SNIF-ACT: A Cognitive Model of User Navigation on the World Wide Web , 2007, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[14]  NilsenErik PERCEPTUAL-MOTOR CONTROL IN HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION , 1991 .

[15]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Title Bounded Optimal State Estimation and Control in Visual Search : Explaining Distractor Ratio Effects Permalink , 2013 .

[16]  Edward Cutrell,et al.  What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search , 2007, CHI.

[17]  Richard M. Young,et al.  A dual-space model of iteratively deepening exploratory learning , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[18]  Pamela Effrein Sandstrom,et al.  Information Foraging Theory: Adaptive Interaction with Information , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..