The effect of four user interface concepts on visual scan pattern similarity and information foraging in a complex decision making task.

User interface (UI) design can affect the quality of decision making, where decisions based on digitally presented content are commonly informed by visually sampling information through eye movements. Analysis of the resulting scan patterns - the order in which people visually attend to different regions of interest (ROIs) - gives an insight into information foraging strategies. In this study, we quantified scan pattern characteristics for participants engaging with conceptually different user interface designs. Four interfaces were modified along two dimensions relating to effort in accessing information: data presentation (either alpha-numerical data or colour blocks), and information access time (all information sources readily available or sequential revealing of information required). The aim of the study was to investigate whether a) people develop repeatable scan patterns and b) different UI concepts affect information foraging and task performance. Thirty-two participants (eight for each UI concept) were given the task to correctly classify 100 credit card transactions as normal or fraudulent based on nine transaction attributes. Attributes varied in their usefulness of predicting the correct outcome. Conventional and more recent (network analysis- and bioinformatics-based) eye tracking metrics were used to quantify visual search. Empirical findings were evaluated in context of random data and possible accuracy for theoretical decision making strategies. Results showed short repeating sequence fragments within longer scan patterns across participants and conditions, comprising a systematic and a random search component. The UI design concept showing alpha-numerical data in full view resulted in most complete data foraging, while the design concept showing colour blocks in full view resulted in the fastest task completion time. Decision accuracy was not significantly affected by UI design. Theoretical calculations showed that the difference in achievable accuracy between very complex and simple decision making strategies was small. We conclude that goal-directed search of familiar information results in repeatable scan pattern fragments (often corresponding to information sources considered particularly important), but no repeatable complete scan pattern. The underlying concept of the UI affects how visual search is performed, and a decision making strategy develops. This should be taken in consideration when designing for applied domains.

[1]  D. Ballard,et al.  Eye movements in natural behavior , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  Seref Sagiroglu,et al.  Big data: A review , 2013, 2013 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS).

[3]  J M Findlay,et al.  A probability vector and transition matrix analysis of eye movements during visual search. , 1995, Acta psychologica.

[4]  Michael E. Holmes,et al.  Clutter or content?: how on-screen enhancements affect how TV viewers scan and what they learn , 2006, ETRA.

[5]  J. Henderson Human gaze control during real-world scene perception , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  Andrew Howes,et al.  A Cognitive Model of How People Make Decisions Through Interaction with Visual Displays , 2017, CHI.

[7]  Jeff B. Pelz,et al.  Recurrence quantification analysis reveals eye-movement behavior differences between experts and novices , 2014, ETRA.

[8]  Karl R Gegenfurtner,et al.  Visual reinforcement shapes eye movements in visual search. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[9]  R. Pieters,et al.  Visual Attention to Repeated Print Advertising: A Test of Scanpath Theory , 1999 .

[10]  T. Foulsham,et al.  What can saliency models predict about eye movements? Spatial and sequential aspects of fixations during encoding and recognition. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[11]  Brian Lukoff,et al.  Testing for statistically significant differences between groups of scan patterns , 2008, ETRA.

[12]  Christer Carlsson,et al.  Decision analytics - Key to digitalisation , 2017, Inf. Sci..

[13]  Niall M. Adams,et al.  Transaction aggregation as a strategy for credit card fraud detection , 2009, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[14]  Abdul V. Roudsari,et al.  Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[15]  Michael E. Holmes,et al.  Visual attention to repeated internet images: testing the scanpath theory on the world wide web , 2002, ETRA.

[16]  B. Newell,et al.  Empirical tests of a fast-and-frugal heuristic: Not everyone "takes-the-best" , 2003 .

[17]  Denis Fize,et al.  Speed of processing in the human visual system , 1996, Nature.

[18]  B. Laeng,et al.  Eye scanpaths during visual imagery reenact those of perception of the same visual scene , 2002 .

[19]  Andy P. Field,et al.  Discovering Statistics Using Ibm Spss Statistics , 2017 .

[20]  Alan Kingstone,et al.  Recurrence quantification analysis of eye movements , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[21]  Ekrem Duman,et al.  A cost-sensitive decision tree approach for fraud detection , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[22]  Stephan Diehl,et al.  Comparing the Readability of Graph Layouts using Eyetracking and Task-oriented Analysis , 2009, CAe.

[23]  B. Newell,et al.  Take the best or look at the rest? Factors influencing "one-reason" decision making. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  D. Hand,et al.  Prospecting for gems in credit card data , 2001 .

[25]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Supporting theoretically-grounded model building in the social sciences through interactive visualisation , 2017, Neurocomputing.

[26]  Christopher W. Myers Toward a method of objectively determining scanpath similarity , 2010 .

[27]  L. Stark,et al.  Spontaneous Eye Movements During Visual Imagery Reflect the Content of the Visual Scene , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[28]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Humans use directed and random exploration to solve the explore-exploit dilemma. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[29]  John Scott What is social network analysis , 2010 .

[30]  Joseph H. Goldberg,et al.  Visual scanpath representation , 2010, ETRA.

[31]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research : Ready to deliver the promises , 2002 .

[32]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  ScanMatch: A novel method for comparing fixation sequences , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[33]  Dietrich Manzey,et al.  Misuse of automated decision aids: Complacency, automation bias and the impact of training experience , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[34]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Heuristic decision making. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[35]  A. L. I︠A︡rbus Eye Movements and Vision , 1967 .

[36]  S R Ellis,et al.  Statistical Dependency in Visual Scanning , 1986, Human factors.

[37]  T. Gog,et al.  In the eyes of the beholder: How experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli , 2010 .

[38]  L. Itti,et al.  Defending Yarbus: eye movements reveal observers' task. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[39]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[40]  G. Gigerenzer,et al.  Risk, Uncertainty, and Heuristics , 2014 .

[41]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  A simple way to estimate similarity between pairs of eye movement sequences , 2012 .

[42]  Chris Baber,et al.  Workflows and individual differences during visually guided routine tasks in a road traffic management control room. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[43]  Alan Kingstone,et al.  A comparison of scanpath comparison methods , 2014, Behavior Research Methods.

[44]  Charlotte H. Mason,et al.  Visual Representation: Implications for Decision Making , 2007 .

[45]  Kathleen L. Mosier,et al.  Accountability and automation bias , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[46]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Sensitivity to spatiotemporal colour contrast in the peripheral visual field , 1983, Vision Research.

[47]  Adriano M. Pereira,et al.  Characterizing and Evaluating Fraud in Electronic Transactions , 2012, 2012 Eighth Latin American Web Congress.

[48]  Pradeep Ray,et al.  Artificial immune systems for the detection of credit card fraud: an architecture, prototype and preliminary results , 2012, Inf. Syst. J..

[49]  I. Rentschler,et al.  Peripheral vision and pattern recognition: a review. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[50]  Stephanie Wilson,et al.  Identifying web usability problems from eye-tracking data , 2007 .

[51]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: A Survey , 1996, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[52]  K. Leonard The development of a rule based expert system model for fraud alert in consumer credit , 1995 .

[53]  Giacomo Veneri,et al.  Evaluating gaze control on a multi-target sequencing task: The distribution of fixations is evidence of exploration optimisation , 2012, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[54]  Anne R. Haake,et al.  eyePatterns: software for identifying patterns and similarities across fixation sequences , 2006, ETRA.

[55]  R. Hari,et al.  Experiencing Art: The Influence of Expertise and Painting Abstraction Level , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[56]  T. Foulsham,et al.  Saliency and scan patterns in the inspection of real-world scenes: Eye movements during encoding and recognition , 2009 .

[57]  Kenneth Holmqvist,et al.  Eye tracking: a comprehensive guide to methods and measures , 2011 .

[58]  Siddhartha Bhattacharyya,et al.  Data mining for credit card fraud: A comparative study , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[59]  Anthony J. Hornof,et al.  Towards accurate and practical predictive models of active-vision-based visual search , 2014, CHI.

[60]  Linden J. Ball,et al.  Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. , 2006 .

[61]  David S. Ebert,et al.  Applied visual analytics for economic decision-making , 2008, 2008 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology.

[62]  G. Gigerenzer Rationality for Mortals: How People Cope with Uncertainty , 2008 .

[63]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Using ScanMatch scores to understand differences in eye movements between correct and incorrect solvers on physics problems , 2012, ETRA.