Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Eye tracking in usability studies


Published on

A brief description of why and how to use eye tracking in usability studies. Pros and cons, what to consider when designing the study, analysing the data, and writing a report

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Eye tracking in usability studies

  1. 1. EyeTracking in usability studies
  2. 2. Agenda • Eye tracking as research method • Designing the research question • Setting up the experiment • Conducting the interview • Cued vs. non cued RTA • Data analysis • Report
  3. 3. Eye tracking in usability studies • Unco nscio us cognitive processes TA is not sufficient for verbalizing⇾ thought process • Instinctive and subco nscio us behavior at first meeting with website • Eye movements are not easily interpreted without participant providing context to data
  4. 4. The Research Process CTA vs. RTA Atmosphere Honesty Body Language Framing Ill posed questions Qual. vs. qant. data? Sorroundings Calibration Live transmissions Deception (demand effects) Cued vs. non cued Interest vs. confusion Eye-mind hypothesis Perceptual span and AOIs Information overload Easy to dazzle
  5. 5. Research Questions (Yarbus: The Visitor)
  6. 6. Experimental Setup • Glasses/hard lenses vs. no glasses/lenses (is the sample still even?) • Calibration • Avoid demand effects ask questions the right way⇾ • Several short tasks • Location (lighting, distracting elements ) • Fixation cross (mainly in choice experiments)
  7. 7. Data Collection • We’re testing the website, not the skills of the user • The person conducting the interview does not have any personal interests in the client • Shy/nervous users body language⇾ • Pleasers/demand effects • Yes/no and leading questions are a no-go • Ratings after each task
  8. 8. CTA vs. RTA Two ways to conduct a think aloud interview: 1)the participants are asked to verbalize their thoughts while they are doing tasks = concurrent think aloud (CTA) Distractions, disruption of intuitive/natural interaction, user might look away from screen 2)the participants provide a description of their experiences doing the tasks after each or all of the tasks are completed = retrospective think aloud (RTA) Users rely on memory, risk of fabrication
  9. 9. Cued vs. non cued RTA No cued RTA - No pictures or video during RTA - User must rely on memory only - Few words (depending on the user) Video cued RTA -Video replaying ations - Stimulates memory - Helps identify usability problems - Reduces risk of fabrication Gaze plot cued RTA -Superimposed eye movements on pictures - Stimulates memory less than video cue (no interaction replay) - Layout and navigation comments Gaze video cued RTA -Superimposed eye movements on video - Shows all tasks and interactions - Cognitive reflections - Produces most words
  10. 10. Data Analysis • Heatmaps accumulate all fixations, short or long ⇾ Eye mind hypothesis ⇾ What has been seen vs. usability problem • Global viewing vs. local viewing ⇾ how engaged is the user • AOIs; when and for what? ⇾ Clear, specific questions ⇾ Perceptual span ⇾ False positives/false negatives • Data generating process ⇾ Bottom-up (emotional, saliency) vs. top-down (task driven) Opacity map
  11. 11. ”The design is clumsy and doesn’t match my needs.” R8 Seg. 2 Report • Information overload • Heatmaps and gaze plots give ideas and assumptions – charts show hard facts • Include quotes (positive, negative and neutral) • What they did/where they stumbled ”It seems easier than what they offer now. More logical” R13 Seg. 1 “It’s not revolutionary, but pretty mainstream and up-to-date.” R10 Seg. 1