How Different Presentation Modes of Graphical Icons Affect Viewers’ First Fixation and Attention

  • Hsuan LinEmail author
  • Wei Lin
  • Wang-Chin Tsai
  • Yu-Chen Hsieh
  • Fong-Gong Wu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9176)


This study aimed to explore how different presentation modes of graphical icons affect the viewer’s attention. The relevant experiment was designed to investigate three main variables: icon composition, polarity, and border. Through permutation and combination, six presentation modes were obtained as follows: line + positive polarity + border (M1), plane + positive polarity + border (M2), line + negative polarity + border (M3), plane + negative polarity + border (M4), line + positive polarity + no border (M5), and plane + positive polarity + no border (M6). Thirty-six participants were required to watch thirty stimuli, or graphical icons, presented concurrently in six abovementioned modes. The number of first fixations was recorded by eye-trackers; meanwhile, subjective evaluation of attention was conducted and analyzed. As indicated by the experimental results, the icons presented in M4 attracted the most attention; in contrast, the icons presented in M5 attracted the least attention. The findings herein can be used as a reference by interface designers while icons are being designed.


Eye-tracking Line composition Plane composition Positive polarity Negative polarity With border Borderless 


  1. 1.
    Albinsson, P.-A., Zhai, S.: High Precision Touch Screen Interaction, pp. 105–112. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu, F.-G., Lin, H., You, M.: Direct-touch vs. mouse input for navigation modes of the web map. Displays 32(5), 261–267 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang, H., Lai, H.-H.: Factors influencing the usability of icons in the LCD touchscreen. Displays 29(4), 339–344 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lindberg, T., Näsänen, R.: The effect of icon spacing and size on the speed of icon processing in the human visual system. Displays 24(3), 111–120 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu, F.-G., Lin, H., You, M.: The enhanced navigator for the touch screen: A comparative study on navigational techniques of web maps. Displays 32(5), 284–295 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleetwood, M.D., Byrne, M.D.: Modeling icon search in ACT-R/PM. Cogn. Syst. Res. 3(1), 25–33 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beringer, D.B., Peterson, J.G.: Underlying behavioral parameters of the operation of touch-input devices: Biases, models, and feedback. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 27(4), 445–458 (1985)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sears, A.: Improving touchscreen keyboards: design issues and a comparison with other devices. Interact. Comput. 3(3), 253–269 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goldberg, J.H., Kotval, X.P.: Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 24(6), 631–645 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Legge, G.E., Pelli, D.G., Rubin, G.S.: Psychophysics of reading—I. Normal Vision Vision Res. 25(2), 239–252 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Legge, G.E., Rubin, G.S., Luebker, A.: Psychophysics of reading—V. The role of contrast in normal vision. Vision. Res. 27(7), 1165–1177 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Näsänen, R., Karlsson, J., Ojanpää, H.: Display quality and the speed of visual letter search. Displays 22(4), 107–113 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Horton, W. K., The icon book: Visual symbols for computer systems and documentation. Wiley & Sons, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang, K.-C., Chiu, T.-L.: Visual search performance on an LCD monitor: effects of color combination of figure and icon background, shape of icon, and line width of icon border. Percept. Mot. Skills 104(2), 562–574 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bullimore, M., Howarth, P., Fulton, J.: Assessment of visual performance. In: Evaluation of Human Work: A Practical Ergonomics Methodology, pp. 804–839 (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mirzoeff, N.: The visual culture reader. Psychology Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Curry, M. B., McDougall, S. J., de Bruijn, O.: The effects of the visual metaphor in determining icon efficacy. pp. 1590–1594 (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dewar, R.: Design and evaluation of public information symbols. In: Zwaga, H.J.G., Boersma, T., Hoonhout, H.C.M. (eds.) Visual information for everyday use: Design and research perspectives, pp. 285–303. (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Easterby, R.S.: The perception of symbols for machine displays. Ergonomics 13(1), 149–158 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wong, W.: Principles of Form and Design. Wiley & Sons, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wolfe, J.M., Oliva, A., Horowitz, T.S.: Segmentation of objects from backgrounds in visual search tasks. Vision. Res. 42(28), 2985–3004 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hsuan Lin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wei Lin
    • 2
  • Wang-Chin Tsai
    • 3
  • Yu-Chen Hsieh
    • 4
  • Fong-Gong Wu
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Product DesignTainan University of TechnologyTainanTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Interior DesignHwa Hsia University of TechnologyTaipeiTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of Product and Media DesignFo Guang UniversityYilanTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Industrial DesignNational Yunlin University of Science and TechnologyYunlinTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Industrial DesignNational Cheng Kung UniversityTainanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations