Investigating the Relationship between Web Object Characteristics and Cognitive Conflict Using Mouse-tracking

ABSTRACT The present study used mouse-tracking to investigate the impacts of web object characteristics on cognitive conflict during a naturalistic website use task. An online survey (N = 191) gathered baseline location typicality ratings for common web objects. An in-person laboratory study (N = 101) presented images of popular websites with target objects in expected (e.g., Cart, top right) or unexpected (e.g., Cart, top left) locations. Participants searched for and clicked on targets while continuous mouse trajectories were recorded. Mouse-tracking measures revealed evidence for cognitive conflict for three of the targets when they appeared in unexpected locations (Menu, Cart, Account). Response times and error rates were unaffected, and results were robust to variability in familiarity with targets and websites. These results suggest that mouse-tracking can be used to examine the relationship between target characteristics and cognitive conflict, and that cognitive conflict depends on the identity and location of web objects.

[1]  G. Stoet.  PsyToolkit , 2017 .

[2]  Mounia Lalmas,et al.  On saliency, affect and focused attention , 2012, CHI.

[3]  P. M. Hartigan,et al.  Computation of the Dip Statistic to Test for Unimodality , 1985 .

[4]  Tom G. E. Damen,et al.  When conflict influences liking: The case of the Stroop task , 2018, PloS one.

[5]  Morten Hertzum,et al.  The Effect of Target Precuing on Pointing With Mouse and Touchpad , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Erica L. Olmsted-Hawala,et al.  Age-Related Differences in Eye Tracking and Usability Performance: Website Usability for Older Adults , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[7]  Jonathan B Freeman,et al.  MouseTracker: Software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[8]  Cendri A. C. Hutcherson,et al.  Dietary Self-Control Is Related to the Speed With Which Attributes of Healthfulness and Tastiness Are Processed , 2015, Psychological science.

[9]  Hansol Rheem,et al.  Use of Mouse-tracking Method to Measure Cognitive Load , 2018, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting.

[10]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Why structure and genre matter for users of digital information: A longitudinal experiment with readers of a web-based newspaper , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[11]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Continuous Dynamics in Real-Time Cognition , 2006 .

[12]  Jennifer Wiley,et al.  What Are the Odds? A Practical Guide to Computing and Reporting Bayes Factors , 2014, J. Probl. Solving.

[13]  J. Hartigan,et al.  The Dip Test of Unimodality , 1985 .

[14]  Martial Mermillod,et al.  Differential effects of visual uncertainty and contextual guidance on perceptual decisions: Evidence from eye and mouse tracking in visual search. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[15]  Gijsbert Stoet,et al.  PsyToolkit: A software package for programming psychological experiments using Linux , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[16]  Ernesto Arroyo,et al.  Usability tool for analysis of web designs using mouse tracks , 2006, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[17]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  Task demands and memory in web interaction: a levels of processing approach , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[18]  Paul E. Stillman,et al.  How Mouse-tracking Can Advance Social Cognitive Theory , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[20]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  Mind Over Mouse: The Effect of Cognitive Load on Mouse Movement Behavior , 2015, ICIS.

[21]  Jaimie F. Veale,et al.  Edinburgh Handedness Inventory – Short Form: A revised version based on confirmatory factor analysis , 2014, Laterality.

[22]  James D. Miles,et al.  Attention is captured by distractors that uniquely correspond to controlled objects: An analysis of movement trajectories , 2014, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[23]  Brittany S. Cassidy,et al.  Looking the part (to me): effects of racial prototypicality on race perception vary by prejudice , 2017, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[24]  J. Freeman,et al.  Advanced mouse-tracking analytic techniques for enhancing psychological science , 2015 .

[25]  G. Baylis,et al.  Visual parsing and response competition: The effect of grouping factors , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Probabilistic Constraint Satisfaction at the Lexical/Phonetic Interface: Evidence for Gradient Effects of Within-Category VOT on Lexical Access , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[27]  J. Stroop.  Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. , 1992 .

[28]  Christopher M. Masciocchi,et al.  Alternatives to Eye Tracking for Predicting Stimulus-Driven Attentional Selection Within Interfaces , 2013, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  Jens Riegelsberger,et al.  Could I have the Menu Please? An Eye Tracking Study of Design Conventions , 2004 .

[30]  J. Cohen,et al.  Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. , 2000, Science.

[31]  Felix Henninger,et al.  Mousetrap: An integrated, open-source mouse-tracking package , 2017, Behavior Research Methods.

[32]  Rick Dale,et al.  The Self-Organization of Explicit Attitudes , 2009, Psychological science.

[33]  Michèle B. Nuijten,et al.  A default Bayesian hypothesis test for mediation , 2015, Behavior research methods.

[34]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[35]  Jonathan B Freeman,et al.  Differential effects of cognitive load on subjective versus motor responses to ambiguously valenced facial expressions. , 2016, Emotion.

[36]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Action Dynamics Reveal Parallel Competition in Decision Making , 2008, Psychological science.

[37]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  Usability of Graphical Icons in the Design of Human-Computer Interfaces , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[38]  J. Freeman,et al.  A Neural Mechanism of Social Categorization , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Graded motor responses in the time course of categorizing atypical exemplars , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[40]  T. Goschke,et al.  How decisions evolve: The temporal dynamics of action selection , 2010, Cognition.

[41]  Jonathan B. Freeman,et al.  Doing Psychological Science by Hand , 2018, Current directions in psychological science.

[42]  Mary C. Dyson,et al.  The effect of violating visual conventions of a website on user performance and disorientation: how bad can it be? , 2008, SIGDOC '08.

[43]  Kerri L. Johnson,et al.  Will a category cue attract you? Motor output reveals dynamic competition across person construal. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[44]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  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.

[46]  Jorge A. Balazs,et al.  Combining eye tracking, pupil dilation and EEG analysis for predicting web users click intention , 2017, Inf. Fusion.

[47]  L. Cooke,et al.  Is Eye Tracking the Next Step in Usability Testing? , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference.

[48]  Michael L. Bernard.  User expectations for the location of web objects , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[49]  Zhuang Fengqing,et al.  Patients’ Responsibilities in Medical Ethics , 2016 .

[50]  Benjamin E. Hilbig,et al.  Cognitive conflict in social dilemmas: An analysis of response dynamics , 2014, Judgment and Decision Making.

[51]  Simone Sulpizio,et al.  Analyzing spatial data from mouse tracker methodology: An entropic approach , 2017, Behavior research methods.

[52]  Paul E. Stillman,et al.  Resisting Temptation: Tracking How Self-Control Conflicts Are Successfully Resolved in Real Time , 2017, Psychological science.

[53]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[54]  David G. Rand,et al.  Spontaneous giving and calculated greed , 2012, Nature.

[55]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[56]  Klaus Opwis,et al.  Mental models for web objects: Where do users expect to find the most frequent objects in online shops, news portals, and company web pages? , 2010, Interact. Comput..

[57]  Joseph G. Johnson,et al.  The response dynamics of preferential choice , 2013, Cognitive Psychology.

[58]  Christopher M. Masciocchi,et al.  Considering the Influence of Visual Saliency during Interface Searches , 2012 .

[59]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Functional Imaging of Decision Conflict , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[60]  M. Steinhauser,et al.  Burdens of non-conformity: Motor execution reveals cognitive conflict during deliberate rule violations , 2016, Cognition.

[61]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  How Is Your User Feeling? Inferring Emotion Through Human-Computer interaction Devices , 2017, MIS Q..

[62]  R. Bakeman.  Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[63]  J. Rouder,et al.  Default Bayes Factors for Model Selection in Regression , 2012, Multivariate behavioral research.

[64]  T. Goschke,et al.  How decisions emerge: action dynamics in intertemporal decision making. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[65]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Sleight of Hand: Identifying Concealed Information by Monitoring Mouse-Cursor Movements , 2019, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[66]  Stefan Scherbaum,et al.  Stuck at the starting line: How the starting procedure influences mouse-tracking data , 2017, Behavior Research Methods.

[67]  Jonas M. B. Haslbeck,et al.  Mouse-Tracking , 2019, A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods.

[68]  Alexandre N. Tuch,et al.  Location matters, especially for non-salient features-An eye-tracking study on the effects of web object placement on different types of websites , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[69]  Gijsbert Stoet,et al.  PsyToolkit: A Novel Web-Based Method for Running Online Questionnaires and Reaction-Time Experiments , 2017 .

[70]  Eva Wiese,et al.  Cognitive Conflict as Possible Origin of the Uncanny Valley , 2017 .

[71]  Satoshi Hirata,et al.  Chimpanzees recognize their own delayed self-image , 2017, Royal Society Open Science.

[72]  Zoltan Dienes,et al.  Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[73]  John R. Anderson,et al.  What can a mouse cursor tell us more?: correlation of eye/mouse movements on web browsing , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[74]  L. Halsey.  The reign of the p-value is over: what alternative analyses could we employ to fill the power vacuum? , 2019, Biology Letters.

[75]  D. Berlyne.  Conflict, arousal, and curiosity , 2014 .