The hunt for usability: tracking eye movements

K. Karn, Steve Ellis, Cornell Juliano
{"title":"The hunt for usability: tracking eye movements","authors":"K. Karn, Steve Ellis, Cornell Juliano","doi":"10.1145/632716.632823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Usability testing methods have not changed significantly since the origins of the practice. Usability studies typically address human performance at a readily observable task-level, including measures like time to complete a task, percentage of participants succeeding, type and number of errors, and subjective ratings of ease of use [3]. Certain types of questions are difficult to answer efficiently with these techniques. Imagine, for example, that we observe users spending longer than expected looking at a particular dialog of a software application or web page without making the appropriate selection to complete the task. Participants often have difficulty reporting their behavior and the experimenter is clueless about what went wrong. Is it because the user is overlooking the control? Is the user distracted by another element in the interface -- perhaps an animated graphic? Is the user seeing the control, but failing to comprehend its meaning? Different answers to these questions would clearly lead to different recommendations. If overlooking the control is a problem, increasing its salience is appropriate. If confusion of the control's function is a problem, changing the graphic or text label may be appropriate. If distraction is a problem, decreasing the salience of other stimuli may help. Without answers to these questions, design recommendations have to be implemented by trial and error. Recording the fixation pattern of the participant's eyes can offer additional information to help answer these questions. While this concept is not new, it has been confined primarily to military aircraft cockpit issues [2,4]. Only recently has eye tracking technology advanced to make it practical in the broader usability community. Usability studies of human-computer systems that have included eye tracking, e.g., [1] are beginning to show benefits of these techniques. However, important challenges remain.","PeriodicalId":263696,"journal":{"name":"CHI '99 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"52","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHI '99 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/632716.632823","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52

Abstract

Usability testing methods have not changed significantly since the origins of the practice. Usability studies typically address human performance at a readily observable task-level, including measures like time to complete a task, percentage of participants succeeding, type and number of errors, and subjective ratings of ease of use [3]. Certain types of questions are difficult to answer efficiently with these techniques. Imagine, for example, that we observe users spending longer than expected looking at a particular dialog of a software application or web page without making the appropriate selection to complete the task. Participants often have difficulty reporting their behavior and the experimenter is clueless about what went wrong. Is it because the user is overlooking the control? Is the user distracted by another element in the interface -- perhaps an animated graphic? Is the user seeing the control, but failing to comprehend its meaning? Different answers to these questions would clearly lead to different recommendations. If overlooking the control is a problem, increasing its salience is appropriate. If confusion of the control's function is a problem, changing the graphic or text label may be appropriate. If distraction is a problem, decreasing the salience of other stimuli may help. Without answers to these questions, design recommendations have to be implemented by trial and error. Recording the fixation pattern of the participant's eyes can offer additional information to help answer these questions. While this concept is not new, it has been confined primarily to military aircraft cockpit issues [2,4]. Only recently has eye tracking technology advanced to make it practical in the broader usability community. Usability studies of human-computer systems that have included eye tracking, e.g., [1] are beginning to show benefits of these techniques. However, important challenges remain.
寻找可用性:追踪眼球运动
可用性测试方法自实践的起源以来并没有发生重大变化。可用性研究通常在一个容易观察到的任务级别上处理人类的表现,包括完成任务的时间、参与者成功的百分比、错误的类型和数量,以及对易用性的主观评价等措施。某些类型的问题很难用这些技巧有效地回答。想象一下,例如,我们观察到用户花费比预期更长的时间来查看软件应用程序或网页的特定对话框,而没有做出适当的选择来完成任务。参与者通常很难报告自己的行为,而实验者也不知道哪里出了问题。是因为用户忽略了控件吗?用户是否被界面中的其他元素分散了注意力——比如动画图像?用户是否看到了控件,但无法理解其含义?对这些问题的不同答案显然会导致不同的建议。如果忽略控制是一个问题,增加其显著性是适当的。如果存在混淆控件功能的问题,则更改图形或文本标签可能是合适的。如果分心是一个问题,减少其他刺激的显著性可能会有所帮助。没有这些问题的答案,设计建议必须通过反复试验来实现。记录参与者眼睛的注视模式可以提供额外的信息来帮助回答这些问题。虽然这一概念并不新鲜,但它主要局限于军用飞机驾驶舱问题[2,4]。直到最近,眼动追踪技术的进步才使它在更广泛的可用性社区中变得实用。包括眼动追踪在内的人机系统的可用性研究(例如b[1])开始显示出这些技术的好处。然而,重要的挑战依然存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信