Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Associative Coloring and Representational Formats on Decision-Making: An Eye-Tracking Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Information Systems and Neuroscience

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 32))

Abstract

This research-in-progress paper presents our ongoing work on the effects of representational options of decision models on decision performance. With the help of eye-tracking, we want to investigate the influence of the color design of textual, graphical and tabular decision models on decision accuracy, efficiency, and cognitive load. For this purpose, we design a controlled experiment to test whether associative color-highlighting (red for negative decision outcome, green for a positive result) makes decision models easier to understand than monochromatic or non-associative color-highlighting.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sloman, S.A.: The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Moody, D. (2009) The physics of notations: Toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mackinlay, J. (1986). Jock: Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 5, 110–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Huysmans, J., Dejaeger, K., Mues, C., Vanthienen, J., & Baesens, B. (2011). An empirical evaluation of the comprehensibility of decision table, tree and rule based predictive models. Decision Support Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boritz, J. E., Borthick, A. F., & Presslee, A. (2012). The effect of business process representation type on assessment of business and control risks: Diagrams versus narratives. Issues in Accounting Education, 27, 895–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ritchi, H., Jans, M. J., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. (2019). The influence of business process representation on performance of different task types. Journal of Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-52385.

  8. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kahneman, D. (2012). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Object Management Group. (2015). Decision Model and Notation v.1.0. 172.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Figl, K., Mendling, J., Tokdemir, G., & Vanthienen, J. (2018). What we know and what we do not know about DMN. Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISAJ), 13, 2:1–16-2:1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Vessey, I., & Weber, R. (1986). Structured tools and conditional logic: An empirical investigation. Communications of the ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Subramanian, G. H., Nosek, J., Rahunathan, S. P., & Kanitkar, S. S. (1992). A comparison of the decision table and tree. Communications of the ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gorla, N., Pu, H. C., & Rom, W. O. (1995). Evaluation of process tools in systems analysis. Information and Software Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gorla, N., Chiravuri, A., & Meso, P. (2013). Effect of personality type on structured tool comprehension performance. Requirements Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Smerecnik, C. M. R., Mesters, I., Kessels, L. T. E., Ruiter, R. A. C., De Vries, N. K., & De Vries, H. (2010). Understanding the positive effects of graphical risk information on comprehension: Measuring attention directed to written, tabular, and graphical risk information. Risk Analysis: An International Journal (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psycholog, 12, 97–136.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lohse, G. L. (1993). A Cognitive model for understanding graphical perception. Human-Computer Interaction, 8, 353–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Treisman, A. (1982). Perceptual grouping and attention in visual search for features and for objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 194–214.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Reijers, H. A., Freytag, T., Mendling, J., & Eckleder, A. (2011). Syntax highlighting in business process models. Decision Support Systems, 51, 339–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Te’eni, D. (2001). Dov: Review: A cognitive-affective model of organizational communication for designing IT. MIS Quarterly, 25, 251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kummer, T. F., Recker, J., & Mendling, J. (2016). Enhancing understandability of process models through cultural-dependent color adjustments. Decision Support Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Petrusel, R., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. A. (2016). Task-specific visual cues for improving process model understanding. Information and Software Technology, 79, 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Vessey, I. (1991). Cognitive fit: A theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decision Sciences, 22, 219–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kliger, D., & Gilad, D. (2012). Red light, green light: Color priming in financial decisions. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41, 738–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gerend, M. A., & Sias, T. (2009). Message framing and color priming: How subtle threat cues affect persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 999–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Heuer, A., & Schubö, A. (2016). Feature-based and spatial attentional selection in visual working memory. Memory & Cognition, 44, 621–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Theeuwes, J. (2013). Feature-based attention: It is all bottom-up priming. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 368, 20130055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. MacEachren, A. M. (1995). How maps work: Representation, visualization, and design. Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Berlin, B., & Kay, P. (1969). Basic color terms. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zagermann, J., Pfeil, U., & Reiterer, H. (2016). Measuring cognitive load using eye tracking technology in visual computing. In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Beyond Time and Errors on Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Clark, J. H. (1924). The Ishihara test for color blindness. American Journal of Physiological Optics.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vienna University of Economics and Business (WU Wien), Vienna, Austria

    Djordje Djurica & Jan Mendling

  2. University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Kathrin Figl

Authors
  1. Djordje Djurica
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Mendling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kathrin Figl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Djordje Djurica .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Information Systems and Quantitative Sciences (ISQS), Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA

    Fred D. Davis

  2. University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Steyr, Oberösterreich, Austria

    René Riedl

  3. Department of Information Systems, University of Liechtenstein, Vaduz, Liechtenstein

    Jan vom Brocke

  4. Department of Information Technology, HEC Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Pierre-Majorique Léger

  5. Department of Information Systems, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA

    Adriane Randolph

  6. Department for Digital Business, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Steyr, Oberösterreich, Austria

    Thomas Fischer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Djurica, D., Mendling, J., Figl, K. (2020). The Impact of Associative Coloring and Representational Formats on Decision-Making: An Eye-Tracking Study. In: Davis, F., Riedl, R., vom Brocke, J., Léger, PM., Randolph, A., Fischer, T. (eds) Information Systems and Neuroscience. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 32. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28144-1_34

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation