Priming Categorization in a Card Sort

  • Camie Steinhoff
  • Jeremiah D. Still
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8004)


When using the card sorting technique, the goal of a user experience researcher is to determine the user’s expected information architecture. Card sorting is a knowledge elicitation method where users are given labeled cards and are asked to place them into groups. This method is commonly used to determine a natural navigation structure for a group of users. We examine the impact of priming, an implicit memory effect in which exposure to a stimulus influences response to a later stimulus, on this popular user-centered design method. A control group did the card sort only, while the experimental group watched a short presentation before performing their card sorts. The dependent measure was the percentage of agreement of each card sort against the typical sort. The primed group sort was significantly more similar to the typical response than the control group. This study provides evidence that card sorting can be modulated by priming.


Evaluation methods and techniques Human Centered Design and User Centered Design Card Sorting Priming Knowledge elicitation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bargh, J.A., Chen, M., Burrows, L.: Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(2), 230–244 (1996), doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brucker, J.: Playing with a bad deck: the caveats of card sorting as a web site redesign tool. Journal of Hospital Librarianship 10(1), 41–53 (2010), doi:10.1080/15323260903458741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bussolon, S., Russi, B., Missier, F.D.: Online card sorting: As good as the paper version. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics: Trust and Control in Complex Socio-Technical Systems (2006), doi:10.1145/1274892.1274912Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chi, M.T.H., Koeske, R.: Network representation of a child’s dinosaur knowledge. Developmental Psychology 19, 29–39 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deibel, K., Anderson, R., Anderson, R.: Using edit distance to analyze card sorts. Expert Systems 22(3), 121–128 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dong, J., Shirely, M., Waldo, P.: A user input and analysis tool for information architecture. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2001 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2001), doi:10.1145/634067.634085Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fossum, T., Haller, S.M.: A new quantitative assessment tool for computer science programs. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (2005), doi:10.1145/1151954.1067489Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaffney, G.: What is Card Sorting? Information & Design (2000), (retrieved October 28, 2011)
  9. 9.
    Hudson, W.: Playing your cards right: getting the most from card sorting for navigation design. Interactions 12(5), 56–58 (2005), doi:10.1145/1082369.1082410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnston, W.A., Dark, V.J.: Selective attention. Annual Review of Psychology 37, 43–75 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lakoff, G.: Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maiden, N.M., Hare, M.M.: Problem domain categories in requirements engineering. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 49(3), 281–304 (1998), doi:10.1006/ijhc.1998.0206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Makoski, D.: Vacations or groceries? Purchase modeling and loyalty programs. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences (2003), doi:10.1145/997078.997086Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marsh, R.L., Bink, M.L., Hicks, J.L.: Conceptual priming in a generative problem-solving task. Memory & Cognition 27(2), 355–363 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller, C.: Item sampling for information architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2011), doi:10.1145/1978942.1979264Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nakhimovsky, Y., Schusteritsch, R., Rodden, K.: Scaling the card sort method to over 500 items: restructuring the Google AdWorks Help Center. In: CHI 2006 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2006), doi:10.1145/1125451.1125491Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nisbett, R.E., Wilson, T.D.: The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35(4), 250–256 (1977), doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.4.250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Pirolli, P., Card, S.: Information foraging. Psychological Review 106(4), 643–675 (1999), doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ratcliff, R., McKoon, G.: A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review 95(3), 385–408 (1988), doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.3.385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rugg, G., McGeorge, P.: The sorting techniques: A tutorial paper on card sorts, picture sorts and item sorts. Expert Systems 14(2), 80–93 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sanders, K., Fincher, S., Bouvier, D., Lewandowski, G., Morrison, B., Murphy, L., Petre, M., Richards, B., Tenenberg, J., Thomas, L., Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Fitzgerald, S., Gutschow, A., Haller, S., Lister, R., McCauley, R., McTaggart, J., Prasad, C., Scott, T., Shinners-Kennedy, D., Westbrook, S., Zander, C.: A multi-institutional, multinational study of programming concepts using card sort data. Expert Systems 22(3), 129–138 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith, S.M., Ward, T.B., Schumacher, J.S.: Constraining effects of examples in a creative generations task. Memory & Cognition 21(6), 837–845 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Spencer, D., Warfel, T.: Card Sorting: a Definitive Guide (2003), (retrieved October 28, 2011)
  25. 25.
    Stevens, S.M., Dornburg, C.C.: Utilizing pathfinder in the design of an intranet website. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2009), doi:10.1145/1520340.1520622Google Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    White, H., Wright, T., Chawner, B.: Usability evaluation of library online catalogues. In: Proceedings of the 7th Australasian User Interface Conference. Australian Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Camie Steinhoff
    • 1
  • Jeremiah D. Still
    • 1
  1. 1.Missouri Western State UniversitySaint JosephUSA

Personalised recommendations