Skip to main content

Differences of Field Dependent/Independent Gamers on Cultural Heritage Playing: Preliminary Findings of an Eye–Tracking Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Digital Heritage. Progress in Cultural Heritage: Documentation, Preservation, and Protection (EuroMed 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10059))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 2394 Accesses

Abstract

Based on a large number of different cognitive theories on information processing procedure, suggesting that individuals have different approaches in the way they forage, retrieve, process, store and recall information, this paper investigates the effect of field dependence/independence with regards to visual attention of gamers in the context of a cultural heritage game. Gaze data were collected and analysed from fourteen participants, who were classified as field dependent or independent according to Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT), a cognitive style elicitation instrument. The collected data were analysed quantitatively to examine visual attention in terms of fixation count and fixation impact. The results revealed statistically significant differences in both fixation count and fixation impact towards interactive game elements. Statistically significant differences were also measured for specific types of game elements. Findings are expected to provide insights for designers and researchers aiming to design more user–centric cultural heritage games.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allinson, C.W., Hayes, J.: The cognitive style index: a measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research. J. Manage. Stud. 33(1), 119–135 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, E.F., McLoughlin, L., Liarokapis, F., Peters, C., Petridis, P., de Freitas, S.: Developing serious games for cultural heritage: a state-of-the-art review. Virtual Real. 14(4), 255–275 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Angeli, C., Valanides, N., Kirschner, P.: Field dependence-independence and instructional-design effects on learners’ performance with a computer-modeling tool. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25(6), 1355–1366 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Buscher, G., Cutrell, E., Morris, M.R.: What do you see when you’re surfing?: using eye tracking to predict salient regions of web pages. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2009), pp. 21–30. ACM, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chapman, D.M., Calhoun, J.G.: Validation of learning style measures: implications for medical education practice. Med. Educ. 40(6), 576–583 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chiu, L.-H.: A cross-cultural comparison of cognitive styles in Chinese and American children. Int. J. Psychol. 7(4), 235–242 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Coenen, T., Mostmans, L., Naessens, K.: MuseUs: case study of a pervasive cultural heritage serious game. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 6(2), 8: 1–8: 19 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cureton, E.E.: The upper and lower twenty-seven per cent rule. Psychometrika 22(3), 293–296 (1957)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Ehrman, M., Leaver, B.L.: Cognitive styles in the service of language learning. System 31(3), 393–415 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Froschauer, J., Merkl, D., Arends, M., Goldfarb, D.: Art history concepts at play with thiatro. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 6(2), 7: 1–7: 15 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hamilton, C.J.: Beyond sex differences in visuo-spatial processing: the impact of gender trait possession. Br. J. Psychol. 86(1), 1–20 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hughes, R.N.: Sex differences in group embedded figures test performance in relation to sex-role, state and trait anxiety. Curr. Psychol. Res. 1(3–4), 227–234 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Joy, S., Kolb, D.A.: Are there cultural differences in learning style? Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 33(1), 69–85 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Khatib, M., Hosseinpur, R.M.: On the validity of the group embedded figure test (geft). J. Lang. Teach. Res. 2(3), 640–648 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kirton, M.: Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure. J. Appl. Psychol. 61(5), 622 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maghsudi, M.: The interaction between field dependent/independent learning styles and learners’ linguality in third language acquisition. Interact. Multimed. Electron. J. Comput. Enhanced Learn. 7(5), 1–23 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mortara, M., Catalano, C.E., Bellotti, F., Fiucci, G., Houry-Panchetti, M., Petridis, P.: Learning cultural heritage by serious games. J. Cult. Herit. 15(3), 318–325 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nisiforou, E.A., Laghos, A.: Field dependence-independence, eye movement patterns: investigating users differences through an eye tracking study. In: Interacting with Computers (2015). doi:10.1093/iwc/iwv015

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nisiforou, E.A., Michailidou, E., Laghos, A.: Using eye tracking to understand the impact of cognitive abilities on search tasks. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (eds.) UAHCI 2014. LNCS, vol. 8516, pp. 46–57. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07509-9_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Oltman, P.K., Raskin, E., Witkin, H.A.: Group Embedded Figures Test. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Raptis, G.E., Fidas, C.A., Avouris, N.M.: Do field dependence-independence differences of game players affect performance and behaviour in cultural heritage games? In: ACM SIGCHI Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY). ACM, Austin (2016). doi:10.1145/2967934.2968107

  22. Raptis, G.E., Fidas, C.A., Avouris, N.M.: A qualitative analysis of the effect of wholistic-analytic cognitive style dimension on the cultural heritage game playing. In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA). IEEE, Chalkidiki (2016). doi:10.1109/IISA.2016.7785364

  23. Riding, R.J., Cheema, I.: Cognitive styles-an overview and integration. Educ. Psychol. 11(3–4), 193–215 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shinar, D., McDowell, E.D., Rackoff, N.J., Rockwell, T.H.: Field dependence and driver visual search behavior. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 20(5), 553–559 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Witkin, H.A., Goodenough, D.R., Karp, S.A.: Stability of cognitive style from childhood to young adulthood. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 7(3), 291–300 (1967)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Witkin, H.A., Moore, C.A., Goodenough, D.R., Cox, P.W.: Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. ETS Res. Bull. Ser. 1975(2), 1–64 (1975)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Witkin, H.A., Oltman, P.K., Raskin, E., Karp, S.A.: Group Embedded Figures Test - Scoring Template. Consulting Psychologists, Palo Alto (1971)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George E. Raptis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Raptis, G.E., Fidas, C.A., Avouris, N.M. (2016). Differences of Field Dependent/Independent Gamers on Cultural Heritage Playing: Preliminary Findings of an Eye–Tracking Study. In: Ioannides, M., et al. Digital Heritage. Progress in Cultural Heritage: Documentation, Preservation, and Protection. EuroMed 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10059. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48974-2_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48974-2_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48973-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48974-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics