Insights from Eye Movement into Dynamic Decision-Making Research and Usability Testing
This study shows how the use of various measures of eye movement can serve to portray dynamic decision-making (DDM) in a coherent fashion. We extracted eye movement metrics relative to 1) scanpath, 2) eye fixations, and 3) pupillary response, to characterize DDM during the process of risk assessment. Results from Experiment 1 revealed that incorrect classifications were associated with 1) less efficient information search, 2) difficulties in making sense of critical information, and 3) a low level of cognitive load. In Experiment 2, we used eye tracking to assess the impact on DDM of introducing a decision support system. The addition of a temporal-overview display seems to affect processing time in DDM as indexed by shorter scanpaths and fixations during classifications. These findings illustrate how event-based eye movement measures can reveal characteristics and limitations of the ongoing cognitive processing involved in DDM and also contribute to usability testing.
KeywordsEye movements dynamic decision-making usability testing decision support system
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Edwards, W.: Dynamic decision theory and probabilistic information processing. Human Factors 4, 59–74 (1962)Google Scholar
- 4.Morrison, J., Marshall, S.P., Kelly, R.T., Moore, R.A.: Eye tracking in tactical decision making Environments: Implications for decision support evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ICCRTS, pp. 355–364 (1997)Google Scholar
- 5.Poole, A., Linden, B.J.: Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Current status and future. In: Ghaoui, C. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Human-computer Interaction, pp. 211–219. Idea Group, Hershey (2006)Google Scholar
- 9.Tremblay, S., Vachon, F., Rousseau, R., Breton, R.: Promoting temporal awareness for dynamic decision making in command and control. In: Stanney, K., Hale, K.S. (eds.) Advances in Cognitive Engineering and Neuroergonomics, pp. 3422–3431. CRC Press (2012)Google Scholar