An exploration of the use of eye‐gaze tracking to study problem‐solving on standardized science assessments

Tai, Robert H.; Loehr, John F.; Brigham, Frederick J.

doi:10.1080/17437270600891614

Cited by 82 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of our results confirm the findings of existing work (e.g. Hu et al 2017;Paul and Henry 2002;Tai et al 2006), and some of our results (e.g. pupil data) are novel.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…The use of eye tracking techniques in large-scale assessment has until recently been limited to work on test item design and initial lab-based investigations into item performance (Paulson and Henry 2002;Tai et al, 2006;Solheim and Uppstad 2011;Hu et al 2017;Oranje et al 2017;and Krstić, 2018). However, the rise of research into 'processes data' in assessment (Ercikan and Pellegrino 2017;Zumbo and Hubley 2017) and advances in eye tracker technology (Bixler and D'Mello 2016;D'Mello et al, 2017) suggest that the application of eye tracking techniques can be extended to observations of how tested populations receive and engage with test items.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the studies by Tai et al (2006) and Hu et al (2017), participants were classified into a high-or low-performing group based on their test item accuracy, and then (post-classification), the researchers examined the eye movement patterns between the two groups (also, Krstić et al, 2018). Tai and colleagues concluded that the differences in eye movement patterns validate the notion that (1) different parts of a test item and (2) different sub-tasks are required to successfully answer an item.…”

Section: Eye Tracking and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Observing response processes with eye tracking in international large-scale assessments: evidence from the OECD PIAAC assessment

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on a pilot study that used eye tracking techniques to make detailed observations of item response processes in the OECD Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). The lab-based study also recorded physiological responses using measures of pupil diameter and electrodermal activity. The study tested 14 adult respondents as they individually completed the PIAAC computer-based assessment. The eye tracking observations help to fill an 'explanatory gap' by providing data on variation in item response processes that are not captured by other sources of process data such as think aloud protocols or computer-generated log files. The data on fixations and saccades provided detailed information on test item response strategies, enabling profiling of respondent engagement and response processes associated with successful performance. Much of that activity does not include the use of the keyboard and mouse, and involves 'off-screen' use of pen and paper (and calculator) that are not captured by assessment log-files. In conclusion, this paper points toward an important application of eye tracking in large-scale assessments. This includes insights into response processes in new domains such as adaptive problem-solving that aim to identify individuals' ability to select and combine resources from the digital and physical environment.

show abstract

“…Some of our results confirm the findings of existing work (e.g. Hu et al 2017;Paul and Henry 2002;Tai et al 2006), and some of our results (e.g. pupil data) are novel.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Eye Tracking and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Observing response processes with eye tracking in international large-scale assessments: evidence from the OECD PIAAC assessment

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This work adds to the building body of research in physics education on the importance of visual attention in physics problem solving [23][24][25][26]. As educators and researchers, we often overlook the way our students view visual representations in physics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can short duration visual cues influence students’ reasoning and eye movements in physics problems?

Madsen

Rouinfar

Larson

et al. 2013

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the effects of visual cueing on students' eye movements and reasoning on introductory physics problems with diagrams. Participants in our study were randomly assigned to either the cued or noncued conditions, which differed by whether the participants saw conceptual physics problems overlaid with dynamic visual cues. Students in the cued condition were shown an initial problem, and if they answered that incorrectly, they were shown a series of problems each with selection and integration cues overlaid on the problem diagrams. Students in the noncued condition were also provided a series of problems, but without any visual cues. We found that significantly more participants in the cued condition answered the problems overlaid with visual cues correctly on one of the four problem sets used and a subsequent uncued problem (the transfer problem) on a different problem set. We also found that those in the cued condition spent significantly less time looking at ''novicelike'' areas of the diagram in the transfer problem on three of the four problem sets and significantly more time looking at the ''expertlike'' areas of the diagram in the transfer problem on one problem set. Thus, the use of visual cues to influence reasoning and visual attention in physics problems is promising.

show abstract

“…Similar studies have measured eye movements of experts when viewing art [20] and playing chess [21], and have shown that the increased domain knowledge in these fields affects where people fixate while performing domain-relevant visual tasks. Thus, important differences in the eye movements of experts, who possess the necessary domain knowledge, versus novices, who do not possess such knowledge, can be seen by tracking their eye movements while they are carrying out domain-relevant tasks [22][23][24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in visual attention between those who correctly and incorrectly answer physics problems

Madsen

Larson

Loschky

et al. 2012

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated how visual attention differed between those who correctly versus incorrectly answered introductory physics problems. We recorded eye movements of 24 individuals on six different conceptual physics problems where the necessary information to solve the problem was contained in a diagram. The problems also contained areas consistent with a novicelike response and areas of high perceptual salience. Participants ranged from those who had only taken one high school physics course to those who had completed a Physics Ph.D. We found that participants who answered correctly spent a higher percentage of time looking at the relevant areas of the diagram, and those who answered incorrectly spent a higher percentage of time looking in areas of the diagram consistent with a novicelike answer. Thus, when solving physics problems, top-down processing plays a key role in guiding visual selective attention either to thematically relevant areas or novicelike areas depending on the accuracy of a student's physics knowledge. This result has implications for the use of visual cues to redirect individuals' attention to relevant portions of the diagrams and may potentially influence the way they reason about these problems.

show abstract

An exploration of the use of eye‐gaze tracking to study problem‐solving on standardized science assessments

Cited by 82 publications

References 17 publications

Observing response processes with eye tracking in international large-scale assessments: evidence from the OECD PIAAC assessment

Observing response processes with eye tracking in international large-scale assessments: evidence from the OECD PIAAC assessment

Can short duration visual cues influence students’ reasoning and eye movements in physics problems?

Differences in visual attention between those who correctly and incorrectly answer physics problems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About