Assessing Information Presentation Preferences with Eye Movements

  • Laurel A. King
  • Martha E. Crosby
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4565)


This study investigates the relationship between participants’ self-reported high verbal or high visual information preferences and their performance and eye movements during analytical reasoning problems. Twelve participants, six male and six female, were selected as being more visual than verbal or more verbal than visual in approach, based on the results of a questionnaire administered to 140 college students. Selected participants were tested for individual differences in spatial ability and working memory capacity. They completed a repeated measures experiment while their eye movements were tracked to examine any correlation with their stated preference for verbal or visual information presentation. Performance on analytical reasoning problems with and without an optional diagram is compared between groups and within-subjects. Due to the small number of participants, between-group differences, although indicated, were mostly statistically insignificant. Within-subject analysis is still being completed, but trends in diagram usage are examined.


information presentation eye tracking analytical reasoning problem representation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Sternberg, R.J., Zhang, L. (eds.): Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jonassen, D., Grabowski, B.L.: Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mayer, R.E., Massa, L.J.: Three Facets of Visual and Verbal Learners: Cognitive Ability, Cognitive Style, and Learning Preference. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, 833–846 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cox, R.: Representation construction, externalized cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction 9, 343–363 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox, R., Brna, P.: Supporting the use of external representations in problem solving: The need for flexible learning environments. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 6, 239–302 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoon, D., Narayanan, N.H.: Mental imagery in problem solving: an eye tracking study. In: Proceedings of the Third ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pylyshyn, Z.W.: What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain: a critique of mental imagery. Psychological Bulletin 80, 1–24 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kosslyn, S.M., Pinker, S., Smith, G.E., Schwartz, S.P.: On the demystification of mental imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2, 535–581 (1979)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson, J.R.: Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery. Psychological Review 85, 249–277 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huber, G.P.: Cognitive Style as a Basis for MIS and DSS Designs: Much Ado About Nothing. Management Science 29, 511–567 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peterson, E.R., Deary, I.J., Austin, E.J.: A new measure of Verbal–Imagery Cognitive Style: VICS. Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Riding, R.J.: Cognitive Styles Analysis. Learning and Training Technology, Birmingham (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacob, R.J.K.: Eye Tracking in Advanced Interface Design. In: Barfield, W., Furness, T.A. (eds.) Virtual Environments and Advanced Interface Design, pp. 258–288. Oxford University Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Just, M.A., Carpenter, P.A.: Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology 8, 441–480 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Richardson, A.: Mental imagery and memory: Coding ability or coding preference? Journal of Mental Imagery 2 (1978)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    King, L.: Predicting User Task with a Neural Network. In: HCI International, vol. 1, pp. 332–336. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, New Orleans, LA (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    King, L.: The Relationship between Scene and Eye Movements. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, Hawaii (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crosby, M.E., Stelovsky, J.: Using enhanced eye monitoring equipment to relate subject differences and presentation material. In: Groner, R., d’ Ydewalle, R., Parham, R. (eds.) From eye to mind: information acquisition in perception, search and reading, Elsevier, North-Holland (1990)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hegarty, M.: Mental animation: inferring motion from static diagrams of mechanical systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 18, 1084–1102 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scaife, M., Rogers, Y.: External cognition: how do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45, 185–213 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Larkin, J.H., Simon, H.A.: Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11, 65–99 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cheng, P.C.-H.: Functional Roles for the Cognitive Analysis of Diagrams in Problem Solving. In: Cottrell, G.W. (ed.) Proceeding of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 207–212. Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Hillsdale (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mayer, R.E.: Thinking, problem solving, cognition. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R.: Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: elements of expertise in geometry. Cognitive Science 14, 511–550 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mayer, R.E., Gallini, J.K.: When Is an Illustration Worth Ten Thousand Words? Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 715–726 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Carney, R.N., Levin, J.R.: Pictorial illustrations still improve students learning from text. Educational Psychology Review 14, 5–26 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stenning, K., Oberlander, J.: A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: logic and implementation. Cognitive Science 19 (1995)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Narayanan, N.H.: Technical Report CSE97-06: Diagrammatic Communication: A Taxonomic Overview. Auburn University (1997)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tufte, E.R.: Visual and Statistical Thinking: Displays of Evidence for Making Decisions. Graphics Press LLC, Cheshire (1997)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tufte, E.R.: Envisioning information. Graphics Press LLC, Cheshire (1990)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tufte, E.R.: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press LLC, Cheshire (1983)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paivio, A.: Imagery and verbal processes. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., New York (1971)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jain, H.K., Ramamurthy, K., Sundaram, S.: Effectiveness of Visual Interactive Modeling in the Context of Multiple-Criteria Group Decisions. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man. and Cybernetics Part. A:Systems and Humans 36, 298–318 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mendelson, A.L., Thorson, E.: How verbalizers and visualizers process the newspaper environment. Journal of Communication 54, 474–491 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Richardson, A.: Verbalizer-visualizer: a cognitive style dimension. Journal of Mental Imagery 1, 109–126 (1977)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H.: Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ (1976)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurel A. King
    • 1
  • Martha E. Crosby
    • 2
  1. 1.Communication and Information Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa 
  2. 2.Information and Computer Sciences, 1680 East-West Road, POST 317, Honolulu, HI 96822 

Personalised recommendations