Elsevier

Decision Support Systems

Volume 163, December 2022, 113862
Decision Support Systems

Advancing our understanding and assessment of cognitive effort in the cognitive fit theory and data visualization context: Eye tracking-based approach

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2022.113862Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We highlight the need in CFT research to focus on advancing our more direct assessment and measurement of cognitive effort

  • Eye fixation-based metrics can be useful in advancing our understanding of cognitive fit and its cognitive effort mechanism

  • In all tasks except the complex-symbolic task, users experience change in cognitive effort based on cognitive fit

  • Physiological indicators can provide insights that may be missed if using only perceptual measures of cognitive effort

Abstract

In Cognitive Fit Theory (CFT) based research, there is a consensus about cognitive effort as the underlying mechanism impacting performance. Although critical to the theory, cognitive effort and its direct empirical assessment remain a challenge. In this repeated measures experimental study, we introduce a research model and develop hypotheses based on the fundamental relationships underlying CFT while integrating eye tracking as an approach for assessing cognitive effort. Our study finds that eye tracking technology, specifically fixation-based metrics, can be used in the understanding of cognitive processes initiated by our data representation choices. Specifically, we find that in all tasks except the complex-symbolic task, users experience meaningful change in the physiological assessment of cognitive effort based on the condition of cognitive fit. We contrast our findings to existing research and find that physiological indicators of cognitive effort can provide critical insights often missed in traditional CFT research.

Introduction

Cognitive Fit Theory (CFT) [1,2], even after over 30 years, continues to significantly impact our understanding of how visual data representations, through their matching with problem tasks and users' mental models, impact decision performance. In the extant CFT research, there is a consensus on the critical role of cognitive effort (sometimes called cognitive workload, burden, strain, or load), yet the research largely fails to integrate cognitive effort measurement [3]. Instead, empirical studies typically only assume cognitive effort's theoretical existence as a function of cognitive fit and as the mechanism that drives decision speed and accuracy. Without a greater understanding of the theorized mechanism, the research could be exposed to criticism that challenges the fundamental underpinnings of substantial portions of CFT literature [4]. One possible reason for the existing state of the research may be found in the difficulty of measuring cognitive effort. Therefore, there is a clear need to enhance current research methods and theory by offering and testing ways cognitive effort could be measured and integrated into CFT and the broader data visualization literature.

To address this opportunity, in this research effort, we turn our attention to a physiological indicator of cognitive effort by deploying eye tracking technology through its ability to collect biometric data that describes users' visual attention. The scarcity of physiological response research in CFT is surprising, given that research findings suggest that evaluating visual interface performance without measuring cognitive processes, such as workload, may lead to incorrect conclusions about the efficiency of an interface. Driven partly by the ‘eye-mind hypothesis’ [5], eye tracking is considered effective in assessing cognitive processes as it reveals how the user reads and scans the displayed information by capturing users' eye fixation-derived metrics [6,7]. These metrics have been successfully linked to cognitive processes indicating various forms of attention, interest, mental effort, and cognitive load in psychology [8], neuroscience [9], art, human factors, marketing, and computer science [10]. In recent years we have also seen the adoption of eye tracking technology in IS research [[11], [12], [13], [14], [15]]. Given the mature and validated use of eye-tracking-based metrics across fields, the application of eye tracking to evaluate cognitive effort in the CFT context is timely and appropriate.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. We first highlight the relevant background associated with CFT and the role of cognitive effort and introduce eye tracking as an approach for measuring cognitive effort. We then present a research model and develop hypotheses based on the fundamental relationships underlying CFT. The following sections present our experimental design and data analysis. We then discuss our findings and contextualize these results by discussing implications, limitations, and potential next steps.

Section snippets

Cognitive fit theory

A series of studies, starting with the Minnesota experiments [16], compared decision performance in various tasks by offering subjects information in tabular and graphical formats. These early studies yielded inconclusive results, motivating the introduction of CFT [1,2] to interpret those results and provide a theoretical basis to predict decision performance. CFT introduced the idea of cognitive fit or a match between the problem representation and the problem-solving task that occurs when

Hypothesis development

According to CFT, if an external problem representation does not match that emphasized in the task, there is nothing to guide the decision-maker in working toward a task solution. As a result, a greater cognitive effort is required to transform the information into a form suitable for solving that particular type of problem [1,2]. The lens of describing cognitive effort as the emergent property of cognitive fit and as the underlying mechanism that influences decision performance dominates the

Experimental design

The experiment was a fully randomized within-subject three-factor design: Task Complexity (simple and complex), Task Type (spatial and symbolic), and Representation (table and graph). This resulted in 8 cell, 2 by 2 by 2 factorial design. All participants performed all experimental tasks associated with eight cells in random order. To avoid the potential bias of using the same answer from the same task and different representation influencing the answer in another representation, a slightly

Cognitive effort - average fixation duration (CEFD)

Repeated measures Analysis of Variance (Table 1) showed a main effect of Task Complexity (F(1,31) = 8.352, p = 0.007, ηp2 = 212) and Task Type (F(1,31) = 4.282, p = 0.047, ηp2 = 0.121). The Analysis of Variance also showed interaction effect of Task Complexity * Task Type (F(1,31) = 51.939, p = 0.000, ηp2 = 0.626), Task Complexity * Representation (F(1,31) = 7.522, p = 0.01, ηp2 = 0.195), Task Type * Representation (F(1,31) = 10.58, p = 0.003, ηp2 = 254), and Task Complexity * Task Type *

Discussion

Our study finds that, in most tested tasks (all except complex-symbolic task), users demonstrate meaningful changes in the cognitive effort, measured using eye-tracking fixation metrics based on the condition of cognitive fit. We detected the impact beyond the individual effects of task complexity, task type, or representation.

Implications, limitations and next steps

There are important implications, questions, and next steps emerging from this research. We identified a consensus around the role of cognitive effort in the context of the visual representation of data. Cognitive effort is the underlying mechanism and one of the key ingredients that makes user response prediction and visual representation recommendation choices possible. Yet IS literature that depends on a deeper understanding of that cognitive effort is scarce, mostly theoretical, and lacking

Conclusion

In this study, we identify and elevate the need for CFT research to focus on advancing our understanding and assessment of cognitive effort. Recognizing the difficulty in measuring cognitive effort, we offer the potential of eye-tracking technology to assess cognitive effort physiologically in the CFT context. Several important implications for phenomenon measurement, theory and empirical research, and practice emerged from our study: (i) fixation-based metrics can be useful in advancing our

Author credit statement

We declare that this manuscript has not been published previously and that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, we assure that both authors (listed on the Title Page document and in that particular order) have fully participated in the research and the article preparation and both of us have approved the submission.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Dinko Bačić is an Assistant Professor of Information Systems and the founder of the UX & Biometrics lab in the Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University Chicago. He holds a DBA degree in Information Systems from the Cleveland State University. His research interests include information visualization, human-computer interaction, biometrics, cognition, neuroIS, business intelligence & analytics, and pedagogy. He has papers published in premier journals such as Decision Support Systems,

References (60)

  • J. Sweller

    Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning

    Cogn. Sci.

    (1988)
  • G.S. Hubona et al.

    Mental representations of spatial language

    Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud.

    (1998)
  • R.E. Wood

    Task complexity: definition of the construct

    Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.

    (1986)
  • I. Vessey

    The effect of information presentation on decision making: a cost-benefit analysis

    Inf. Manag.

    (1994)
  • L. Paquette et al.

    The effect of decision strategy and task complexity on decision performance

    Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.

    (1988)
  • I. Vessey

    Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature

    Decis. Sci.

    (1991)
  • I. Vessey et al.

    Cognitive fit: an empirical study of information acquisition

    Inf. Syst. Res.

    (1991)
  • D. Bačić et al.

    Task-representation fit’s impact on cognitive effort in the context of decision timeliness and accuracy: a cognitive fit perspective

    AIS Trans. Human-Computer Interact.

    (2018)
  • K. Rayner

    Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research

    Psychol. Bull.

    (1998)
  • D. Bačić

    Biometrics and business information visualization: Research review, agenda and opportunities

  • P. Ayres et al.

    Cognitive load theory: new directions and challenges

    Appl. Cogn. Psychol.

    (2012)
  • A.T. Duchowski

    Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice

    (2017)
  • P.-M. Léger et al.

    Precision is in the eye of the beholder: application of eye fixation-related potentials to information systems research

    J. Assoc. Inf. Syst.

    (2014)
  • P. Bera et al.

    Using eye tracking to expose cognitive processes in understanding conceptual models

    MIS Q.

    (2019)
  • A. Vance et al.

    Tuning out security warnings: a longitudinal examination of habituation through fMRI, eye tracking, and field experiments

    MIS Q.

    (2018)
  • G.W. Dickson et al.

    Research in management information systems: the Minnesota experiments

    Manag. Sci.

    (1977)
  • V. Khatri et al.

    Understanding conceptual schemas: exploring the role of application and IS domain knowledge

    Inf. Syst. Res.

    (2006)
  • S. Goswami et al.

    The role of visualization tools in spreadsheet error correction from a cognitive fit perspective

    J. Assoc. Inf. Syst.

    (2008)
  • Z. Bin et al.

    Visualization of network concepts: the impact of working memory capacity differences

    Inf. Syst. Res.

    (2010)
  • B.E. Mennecke et al.

    Is a map more than a picture? The role of SDSS technology, subject characteristics, and problem complexity on map reading and problem solving

    MIS Q.

    (2000)
  • Cited by (10)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Dinko Bačić is an Assistant Professor of Information Systems and the founder of the UX & Biometrics lab in the Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University Chicago. He holds a DBA degree in Information Systems from the Cleveland State University. His research interests include information visualization, human-computer interaction, biometrics, cognition, neuroIS, business intelligence & analytics, and pedagogy. He has papers published in premier journals such as Decision Support Systems, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer Computer Science Lecture Notes, and Leonardo, among others. He has over fifteen years of corporate and consulting experience in business intelligence, finance, project management, and human resources.

    Raymond M. Henry is Professor of Information Systems and Associate Dean in the Monte Ahuja College of Business at Cleveland State University. He received his PhD in Information Systems from the University of Pittsburgh. His research explores topics related to information systems, human-computer interaction, knowledge management and supply chain management. His work has been published in premier journals including Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, Journal of the Association of Information Systems, and Journal of Operations Management, among others.

    View full text