Skip to main content

Cognitive Differences and Their Impact on Information Perception: An Empirical Study Combining Survey and Eye Tracking Data

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 10))

Abstract

Research shows that the quality of managerial decision making is dependent on both the availability and the interpretation of information. Visualizations are widely used to transform raw data into a more understandable format and to compress the constantly growing amount of information being produced. However, research in this area is highly fragmented and results are contradicting. A possible explanation for inconsistent results is the neglect of individual characteristics such as experience, working memory capacity, or cultural background. We propose a preliminary model based on an extensive literature review on cognition theory that sheds light on potential individual antecedents of information processing efficiency. Our preliminary results based on eye tracking, automated span tasks, as well as survey data show that domain expertise, spatial ability and long term orientation exert a significant influence on this cognitive construct.

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 EPUB and 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. Dilla, W., Janvrin, D.J., Raschke, R.: Interactive data visualization: new directions for accounting information systems research. J. Inf. Syst. 24(2), 1–37 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Edmunds, A., Morris, A.: The problem of information overload in business organizations: a review of the literature. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 20(1), 17–28 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Eppler, M.J., Mengis, J.: The concept of information overload: a review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. Inf. Soc. 20, 35–344 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lurie, N.H., Mason, C.H.: Visual representation: implications for decision making. J. Mark. 71(1), 160–177 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tortosa-Edo, V., López-Navarro, M.A., Llorens-Monzonís, J., Rodríguez-Artola, R.M.: The antecendent role of personal environment values in the relationships among trust in companies, information processing and risk perception. J. Risk Res. 17(8), 1019–1035 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Al-Kassab, J., Ouertani, Z.M., Schiuma, G., Neely, A.: Information visualization to support management decisions. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Making 13(2), 407–428 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Parsons, P., Sedig, K.: Adjustable properties of visual representations: improving the quality of human-information interaction. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 65(3), 455–482 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Conati, C., Maclaren, H.: Exploring the role of individual differences in information visualization. In: Proceedings of AVI 2008, pp. 199–206. ACM (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Barat, A.H.: Human perception and knowledge organization: visual imagery. Libr. Hi Tech. 25(3), 338–351 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Galletta, D., Vessey, I.: Cognitive fit: an empirical study of information acquisition. Inf. Syst. Res. 2(1), 63–84 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Porat, T., Oron-Gilad, T., Meyer, J.: Task-dependent processing of tables and graphs. Behav. Inf. Technol. 28(3), 293–307 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. So, S., Smith, M.: Multivariate decision accuracy and the presentation of accounting information. Acc. Forum 28(3), 283–305 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dilla, W.N., Janvrin, D.J.: Voluntary disclosure in annual reports: the association between magnitude and direction of change in corporate financial performance and graph use. Acc. Horiz. 24(2), 257–278 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Parush, A., Hod, A., Shtub, A.: Impact of visualization type and contextual factors on performance with enterprise resource planning systems. Comput. Ind. Eng. 52(1), 133–142 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Peck, E.M., Yuksel, B.R., Harrison, L., Ottley, A., Remco, C.: Position paper: towards a 3-dimensional model of individual cognitive differences. In: Proceedings of BELIV 2012, pp. 1–6. ACM (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Yigitbasioglu, O.M., Valcu, O.: A review of dashboards in performance management: implications for design and research. Int. J. Acc. Inf. Syst. 13(1), 41–59 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ziemkiewicz, C., Kosara, R.: Beyond bertin: seeing the forest despite the trees. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 30(5), 7–11 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller, G.A.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81–97 (1956)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lord, R.G., Maher, K.J.: Alternative information-processing models and their implications for theory, research, and practice. Acad. Manage. Rev. 15(1), 9–28 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Anderson, E.W., Potter, K.C., Matzen, L.E., Shepherd, J.F., Preston, G.A., Silva, C.T.: A user study of visualization effectiveness using EEG and cognitive load. In: Eurographics/IEEE Symposium on Visualization 2011 vol. 30, issue 3, pp. 791–800 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mostyn, G.R.: Cognitive load theory: what it is, why it’s important for accounting construction and research. Issues Acc. Educ. 27(1), 227–245 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vessey, I.: Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decis. Sci. 22(2), 219–240 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hill, W.Y., Milner, M.M.: Guidelines for graphical displays in financial reporting. Acc. Educ. 12(2), 135–157 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kuang, X., Zhang, H., Zhao, S., McGuffin, M.J.: Tracing tuples across dimensions: a ccomparison of scatterplots and parallel coordinate plots. Comput. Graph. Forum 31(3), 1365–1374 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Speier, C., Vessey, I., Valacich, J.S.: The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and computer-supported decision-making performance. Decis. Sci. 34(4), 771–797 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hard, N.J., Vanecek, M.T.: The implications of task and format on the use of financial information. J. Inf. Syst. 5(2), 35–49 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wood, R.E.: Task complexity: definition of the construct. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 37, 60–82 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Speier, C.: The influence of information presentation formats on complex task decision-making performance. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 64(11), 1115–1131 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gelman, A., Unwin, A.: InfoVis and statistical graphics: different goals, different looks. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 22(1), 2–28 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hahn, U.: Experiential limitation in judgment and decision. Top. Cogn. Sci. 6(2), 229–244 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kook, N., Parente, R., Verville, J.: Can hofstede’s model explain national differences in perceived information overload? a look at data from the US and New Zealand. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 51(1), 33–49 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Goldberg, J., Helfman, J.: Eye tracking on visualizations: progressive extraction of scanning strategies. In: Huang, W. (ed.) Handbook of Human Centric Visualization, pp. 337–372. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Renshaw, J.A., Finlay, J.E., Tyfa, D., Ward, R.D.: Designing for visual influence: an eye tracking study of the usability of graphical management information. In: Proceedings of Interact 2003, pp. 144–151. ACM (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Redick, T.S., Broadway, J.M., Meier, M.E., Kuriakose, N.U., Kane, M.J., Engle, R.W.: Measuring working memory capacity with automated complex span tasks. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 28(3), 164–171 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hofstede, G.: Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations, 2nd edn. Sage Publications (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M.: A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publishing (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa Falschlunger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Falschlunger, L., Treiblmaier, H., Lehner, O., Grabmann, E. (2015). Cognitive Differences and Their Impact on Information Perception: An Empirical Study Combining Survey and Eye Tracking Data. In: Davis, F., Riedl, R., vom Brocke, J., Léger, PM., Randolph, A. (eds) Information Systems and Neuroscience. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18702-0_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics