skip to main content
10.1145/2407085.2407089acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesadcsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Comparing scanning behaviour in web search on small and large screens

Published:05 December 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Although web search on mobile devices is common, little is known about how users read search result lists on a small screen. We used eye tracking to compare users' scanning behaviour of web search engine result pages on a small screen (hand-held devices) and a large screen (desktops or laptops). The objective was to determine whether search result pages should be designed differently for mobile devices. To compare scanning behaviour, we considered only the fixation time and scanning strategy using our new method called 'Trackback'. The results showed that on a small screen, users spend relatively more time to conduct a search than they do on a large screen, despite tending to look less far ahead beyond the link that they eventually select. They also show a stronger tendency to seek information within the top three results on a small screen than on a large screen. The reason for this tendency may be difficulties in reading and the relative location of page folds. The results clearly indicated that scanning behaviour during web search on a small screen is different from that on a large screen. Thus, research efforts should be invested in improving the presentation of search engine result pages on small screens, taking scanning behaviour into account. This will help provide a better search experience in terms of search time, accuracy of finding correct links, and user satisfaction.

References

  1. Aula, A., Majaranta, P. and Raiha, K-J. 2005. Eye-tracking reveals personal styles for search result evaluation. In proceeding of the 2005 IFIP TC13 international conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT'05), Maria Francesca Costabile and Fabio Paternò (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1058--1061. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Biedert, R., Dengel, A., Buscher, B. and Vartan, A. 2012. Reading and estimating gaze on smart phones. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications (ETRA '12), Stephen N. Spencer (Ed.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 385--388. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Buscher, G., Dumais, S. and Cutrell, E. 2010. The good, the bad, and the random: an eye-tracking study of ad quality in web search. In Proceedings of the 33rd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval (SIGIR '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 42--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Cohen, W., Shapire, R., and Singer, Y. 1999. Learning to order things. In Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 10, 243--270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Cutrell, E. and Guan, Z. 2007. What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 407--416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Drewes, H., De Luca, A., and Schmidt, A. 2007. Eye-gaze interaction for mobile phones. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on mobile technology, applications, and systems and the 1st international symposium on Computer human interaction in mobile technology (Mobility '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 364--371. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dumais, S., Buscher, G., and Cutrell, E. 2010. Individual differences in gaze patterns for web search. In Proceedings of the third symposium on Information interaction in context (IIiX '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 185--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Granka, L. A., Joachims, T., and Gay, G. 2004. Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior in WWW search. In Proceedings of the 27th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval (SIGIR '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 478--479. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jansen, B. J. and Spink, A. 2006. How are we searching the World Wide Web? A comparison of nine search engine transaction logs. Information Processing and Management, 42(1), 248--263. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Joachims, T., Granka, L., Pan, B., Hembrooke, H. and Gay, G. 2005. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval (SIGIR '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 154--161. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Klöckner, K., Wirschum, N. and Jameson, A. 2004. Depth-and breadth-first processing of search result lists. In CHI '04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (CHI EA '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1539--1539. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Lorigo, L., Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., Joachims, T., Granka, L. and Gay, G. 2006. The influence of task and gender on search evaluation and behavior using Google. Information Processing and Management, 42(4), 1123--1131. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mat-Hassan, M. and Levene, M. 2005. Associating search and navigation behavior through log analysis. In Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(9), 913--934. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Nagamatsu, T., Yamamoto, M., and SATO, H. 2010. MobiGaze: development of a gaze interface for handheld mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 28th of the international conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (CHI EA '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3349--3354. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Pan, B., Hembrooke, H. A., Gay, G. K., Granka, L. A., Feusner, M. K., Newman, J. K. 2004. The determinants of web page viewing behavior: an eye-tracking study. In Proceedings of the 2004 symposium on Eye tracking research & applications (ETRA '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 147--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Poole, A., & Ball, L. J. 2005. Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Current status and future. In Prospects, Chapter in C. Ghaoui (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Pennsylvania: Idea Group, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Silverstein, C., Henzinger, M., Marais, H. and Moricz, M. 1998. Analysis of a very large AltaVista query log. SRC Technical note #1998-14. On-line at http://gatekeeper.dec.com/pub/DEC/SRC/technicalnotes/abstracts/src-tn-1998-014.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Teevan, J., Alvarado, C., Ackerman, M. S., and Karger, D. R. 2004. The perfect search engine is not enough: a study of orienteering behavior in directed search. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 415--422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ADCS '12: Proceedings of the Seventeenth Australasian Document Computing Symposium
    December 2012
    142 pages
    ISBN:9781450314114
    DOI:10.1145/2407085

    Copyright © 2012 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 5 December 2012

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate30of57submissions,53%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader