Skip to main content

Visual Search and Background Complexity: Does the Forest Hide the Trees?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2109))

Abstract

This research addresses the issue of cognitive complexity or cognitive load in a visual search task. Eye tracking methodology was employed to track users’ eye fixations and scan patterns while counting targets in a visual array. Background complexity and number of targets were varied. Results showed that there was a positive relationship between fixation duration and background complexity and between fixation duration and number of targets in the array. Fixation duration and saccade predicted background complexity and number of targets for simple and systematically varied arrays. These results indicate that eye-tracking data may contribute effectively to the development of user models in crisis management systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. J. Bloomfield. Visual search in complex fields: Size differences between target disc and surrounding discs. In Human Factors. 14(2), pages139–148, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  2. P. Chandler and J, Sweller. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. In Cognition and Instruction. 8(4), pages 293–332, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. C. Drury, M. Clement and R. Clement. The effect of area, density, and number of background characters on visual search. In Human Factors. 20, pages 597–602, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  4. C. Eriksen. Object location in a complex perceptual field. In Journal of Experimental Psychology. 45(3) pages124–132, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. Klahr. Quantification processes. In W.G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing, pages 3–34. New York, 1973. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. T. Monk and B. Brown. The effect of target surround density on visual search performance. In Human Factors. 17(4). Pages 356–360, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  7. W.A. Rogers, M.D. Lee, and A.D. Fisk. Contextual effects on general learning, feature learning, and attention strengthening in visual search. In Human Factors, 37(1), pages 158–172, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. M. Ward, M. and J. Sweller. Structuring effective worked examples. In Cognition and Instruction. 7(1), pages 1–39, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. L. Williams. The effect of target specification on objects fixated during visual search. In Perception and Psychophysics, 1, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Crosby, M.E., Iding, M.K., Chin, D.N. (2001). Visual Search and Background Complexity: Does the Forest Hide the Trees?. In: Bauer, M., Gmytrasiewicz, P.J., Vassileva, J. (eds) User Modeling 2001. UM 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2109. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44566-8_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44566-8_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42325-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44566-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics