Understanding Reading Attention Distribution during Relevance Judgement

Reading is a complex cognitive activity in many information retrieval related scenarios, such as relevance judgement and question answering. There exists plenty of works which model these processes as a matching problem, which focuses on how to estimate the relevance score between a document and a query. However, little is known about what happened during the reading process, i.e., how users allocate their attention while reading a document during a specific information retrieval task. We believe that a better understanding of this process can help us design better weighting functions inside the document and contributes to the improvement of ranking performance. In this paper, we focus on the reading process during relevance judgement task. We designed a lab-based user study to investigate human reading patterns in assessing a document, where users' eye movements and their labeled relevant text were collected, respectively. Through a systematic analysis into the collected data, we propose a two-stage reading model which consists of a preliminary relevance judgement stage (Stage 1) and a reading with preliminary relevance stage (Stage 2). In addition, we investigate how different behavior biases affect users' reading behaviors in these two stages. Taking these biases into consideration, we further build prediction models for user's reading attention. Experiment results show that query independent features outperform query dependent features, which indicates that users allocate attentions based on many signals other than query terms in this process. Our study sheds light on the understanding of users' attention allocation during relevance judgement and provides implications for improving the design of existing ranking models.

[1]  Peter Brusilovsky,et al.  Inferring word relevance from eye-movements of readers , 2011, IUI '11.

[2]  Xueqi Cheng,et al.  DeepRank: A New Deep Architecture for Relevance Ranking in Information Retrieval , 2017, CIKM.

[3]  Pushpak Bhattacharyya,et al.  Eyes are the Windows to the Soul: Predicting the Rating of Text Quality Using Gaze Behaviour , 2018, ACL.

[4]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  From Skimming to Reading: A Two-stage Examination Model for Web Search , 2014, CIKM.

[5]  Roger Levy,et al.  A Rational Model of Eye Movement Control in Reading , 2010, ACL.

[6]  Min Zhang,et al.  Automatic online news issue construction in web environment , 2008, WWW.

[7]  Andreas Stolcke,et al.  SRILM - an extensible language modeling toolkit , 2002, INTERSPEECH.

[8]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. , 1998, Psychological review.

[9]  Frank E. Pollick,et al.  When Relevance Judgement is Happening?: An EEG-based Study , 2015, SIGIR.

[10]  Pia Borlund,et al.  The concept of relevance in IR , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[11]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  How important are linguistic factors in word skipping during reading? , 2007, British journal of psychology.

[12]  Ling Xia,et al.  Eye tracking and online search: Lessons learned and challenges ahead , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior in WWW search , 2004, SIGIR '04.

[14]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Eye movements and the use of parafoveal word length information in reading. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models , 2003, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[16]  K. Rayner The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Attentive documents: Eye tracking as implicit feedback for information retrieval and beyond , 2012, TIIS.

[18]  M. Just,et al.  The psychology of reading and language comprehension , 1986 .

[19]  Frank Keller,et al.  Modeling Human Reading with Neural Attention , 2016, EMNLP.

[20]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Characterizing relevance with eye-tracking measures , 2014, IIiX.

[21]  S. Liversedge,et al.  Saccadic eye movements and cognition , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[23]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Task and user effects on reading patterns in information search , 2011, Interact. Comput..

[24]  Joemon M. Jose,et al.  A comparison of general vs personalised affective models for the prediction of topical relevance , 2010, SIGIR '10.

[25]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  User Satisfaction Prediction with Mouse Movement Information in Heterogeneous Search Environment , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[26]  Cheng Luo,et al.  Overview of the NTCIR-13 We Want Web Task , 2017, NTCIR.

[27]  Reinhold Kliegl,et al.  SWIFT: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. , 2005, Psychological review.

[28]  R. Shillcock,et al.  Low-level predictive inference in reading: the influence of transitional probabilities on eye movements , 2003, Vision Research.

[29]  Philip Bachman,et al.  Iterative Alternating Neural Attention for Machine Reading , 2016, ArXiv.

[30]  Jun Wang,et al.  Automata Modeling for Cognitive Interference in Users' Relevance Judgment , 2010, AAAI Fall Symposium: Quantum Informatics for Cognitive, Social, and Semantic Processes.

[31]  Yike Guo,et al.  A visual attention-based keyword extraction for document classification , 2018, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[32]  Nathaniel J. Smith,et al.  The effect of word predictability on reading time is logarithmic , 2013, Cognition.

[33]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  A faceted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[34]  Ralf Engbert,et al.  A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing , 2002, Vision Research.

[35]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Show, Attend and Tell: Neural Image Caption Generation with Visual Attention , 2015, ICML.

[36]  Hans-Jürgen Bucher,et al.  The relevance of attention for selecting news content. An eye-tracking study on attention patterns in the reception of print and online media , 2006 .

[37]  Filip Radlinski,et al.  Relevance and Effort: An Analysis of Document Utility , 2014, CIKM.

[38]  Joemon M. Jose,et al.  An effective implicit relevance feedback technique using affective, physiological and behavioural features , 2013, SIGIR.

[39]  Kam-Fai Wong,et al.  A retrospective study of a hybrid document-context based retrieval model , 2007, Inf. Process. Manag..

[40]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  The Turn - Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context , 2005, The Kluwer International Series on Information Retrieval.

[41]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Parafoveal processing during reading is reduced across a morphological boundary , 2010, Cognition.

[42]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translate , 2014, ICLR.

[43]  Nick Craswell,et al.  An experimental comparison of click position-bias models , 2008, WSDM '08.

[44]  Yoshinobu Kano,et al.  Predicting Word Fixations in Text with a CRF Model for Capturing General Reading Strategies among Readers , 2012 .