Facilitating the comparison of multiple visual items on screen: the example of electronic architectural plan correction.

This paper describes two experiments designed to (1) ascertain whether the way in which architectural plans are displayed on a computer screen influences the quality of their correction by humans, and (2) identify the visual exploration strategies adopted in this type of task. Results of the first "spot the difference" experiment showed that superimposing the plans yielded better error correction performances than displaying them side by side. Furthermore, a sequential display mode, where the second plan only gradually appeared on the screen, improved error search effectiveness. In the second experiment, eye movement recordings revealed that superimposition increased plan comparison efficiency by making it easier to establish coreference between the two sources of information. The improvement in effectiveness in the sequential condition was shown to be linked to the attentional guidance afforded by this display mode, which helped users to make a more thorough exploration of the plans.

[1]  M. Bindemann.  Scene and screen center bias early eye movements in scene viewing , 2010, Vision Research.

[2]  Eric Jamet,et al.  Attention guiding in multimedia learning , 2008 .

[3]  Aurélie Lemaitre,et al.  Optimization Analysis Based on a Breadth-First Exploration for a Structural Approach of Sketches Interpretation , 2012, 2012 10th IAPR International Workshop on Document Analysis Systems.

[4]  John S. Gero,et al.  To sketch or not to sketch? That is the question , 2006 .

[5]  R. Abrams,et al.  Motion Onset Captures Attention , 2003, Psychological science.

[6]  Cheryl I. Johnson,et al.  An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[7]  R. Hertle,et al.  Relationships between versional and vergent quick phases of the involuntary version-vergence nystagmus. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[8]  Alexander C. Schütz,et al.  Eye movements and perception: a selective review. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[9]  David C Burr,et al.  Temporal auditory capture does not affect the time course of saccadic mislocalization of visual stimuli. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[10]  Tong Lu,et al.  A new recognition model for electronic architectural drawings , 2005, Comput. Aided Des..

[11]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[12]  Anne P. Hillstrom,et al.  Factors that guide or disrupt attentive visual processing , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  Craig A. Knoblock,et al.  A general approach for extracting road vector data from raster maps , 2013, International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition (IJDAR).

[14]  Stephen Dovers,et al.  Collaborative Research on Sustainability: Myths and Conundrums of Interdisciplinary Departments , 2009 .

[15]  Y. Manolopoulou.  Unformed drawing: notes, sketches, and diagrams , 2005 .

[16]  Pao-Ta Yu,et al.  A Comparison of Single- and Dual-Screen Environment in Programming Language: Cognitive Loads and Learning Effects , 2011, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[17]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Oculomotor capture and Inhibition of Return: Evidence for an oculomotor suppression account of IOR , 2002, Psychological research.

[18]  R. Mayer,et al.  When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? , 2001 .

[19]  Randall Davis,et al.  A Visual Approach to Sketched Symbol Recognition , 2009, IJCAI.

[20]  Iain D Gilchrist,et al.  Oculomotor capture by transient events: a comparison of abrupt onsets, offsets, motion, and flicker. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[21]  John S. Gero,et al.  Reasoning with Internal and External Representations: A Case Study with Expert Architects , 2006 .

[22]  Vincenzo Eramo,et al.  An interpretation system for land register maps , 1992, Computer.

[23]  Eric Jamet,et al.  How Can Positive Effects of Pop-Up Windows on Multimedia Learning Be Explained?. , 2011 .

[24]  Scotty D. Craig,et al.  Animated Pedagogical Agents in Multimedia Educational Environments: Effects of Agent Properties, Picture Features, and Redundancy , 2002 .

[25]  R. Klein,et al.  Where to Begin? Eye-Movement When Drawing , 2009 .

[26]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Displaying multi-domain graphical databases: An evaluation of scanning clutter, display size, and user activity , 2002 .

[27]  P. Chandler,et al.  Why Some Material Is Difficult to Learn , 1994 .

[28]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing Sketch­based Interfaces for Modeling and Users' Needs: Redefining Connections Sketch-based Interfaces for Modeling and Users' Needs: Redefining Connections , 2022 .

[29]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Computer Technologies in Powerful Learning Environments: The Case of Using Animated and Interactive Graphics for Teaching Financial Concepts. , 2003 .

[30]  Aurélie Lemaitre,et al.  Competitive Hybrid Exploration for Off-Line Sketches Structure Recognition , 2012, 2012 International Conference on Frontiers in Handwriting Recognition.

[31]  Thomas Martinetz,et al.  Variability of eye movements when viewing dynamic natural scenes. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[32]  Markus Huff,et al.  Distance Matters: Spatial Contiguity Effects as Trade‐Off between Gaze Switches and Memory Load , 2012 .

[33]  Day Chyi Ku,et al.  Interpretation of Overtracing Freehand Sketching for Geometric Shapes , 2006 .

[34]  Joan K. Gallini,et al.  When Is an Illustration Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1990 .

[35]  Anand K. Gramopadhye,et al.  A comparison of three levels of training designed to promote systematic search behavior in visual inspection , 2003 .

[36]  Seong-Whan Lee,et al.  Recognizing Hand-Drawn Electrical Circuit Symbols with Attributed Graph Matching , 1992 .

[37]  Eric Jamet,et al.  Using pop-up windows to improve multimedia learning , 2006, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[38]  Susana T. L. Chung,et al.  The dependence of crowding on flanker complexity and target-flanker similarity. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[39]  Paul Ginns.  Integrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects , 2006 .

[40]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[41]  Levent Burak Kara,et al.  Beautification of Design Sketches Using Trainable Stroke Clustering and Curve Fitting , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[42]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Eye Movements and Problem Solving , 2003, Psychological science.

[43]  Marcus Liwicki,et al.  Improved Automatic Analysis of Architectural Floor Plans , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition.

[44]  Timothy C. Bell,et al.  The Challenge of Optical Music Recognition , 2001, Comput. Humanit..

[45]  K. Holmqvist,et al.  Reading Information Graphics: the Role of Spatial Contiguity and Dual Attentional Guidance , 2022 .

[46]  John Sweller,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: The Split-Attention Principle in Multimedia Learning , 2005 .