The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Development of Integrated Analysis System and Tool of Perception, Recognition, and Behavior for Web Usability Test: With Emphasis on Eye-Tracking, Mouse-Tracking, and Retrospective Think Aloud
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This impact is expected specifically in the case of CTA [67,70], as this method may bring the unnatural behavior of humans during task solving [72].”
From Impact of Think-Aloud on Eye-Tracking: A Comparison of Concurrent and Retrospective Think-Aloud for Research on Decision-Making in the Game Environment (2020) · cites this paper as [72]
In the citing paper
“The unnatural physical behavior of CTA participants can also contribute to the increased number of fixations as speaking may influence the head movements and thus also the eyes [67,70,72].”
From Impact of Think-Aloud on Eye-Tracking: A Comparison of Concurrent and Retrospective Think-Aloud for Research on Decision-Making in the Game Environment (2020) · cites this paper as [72]
In the citing paper
“All examined indicators empirically confirm the claims, that RTA has no impact on eye-tracking metrics, while CTA distorts them significantly [67,70,72].”
From Impact of Think-Aloud on Eye-Tracking: A Comparison of Concurrent and Retrospective Think-Aloud for Research on Decision-Making in the Game Environment (2020) · cites this paper as [72]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Park, C.M.: A Study on the Visulization & Analysis of User Interaction on the WWW, Master Thesis at KAIST (2001)
- Wickens, C.D., Gordon, S.E., Liu, Y.: Intro. Human Factors Engineering. Longman, Longman (1988)
- Nielsen, J.: Designing Web Usability. New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis (2000)
- Trumbo, J.: The Spatial Environment in Multimedia Design: Physical, Conceptual, Perceptual, and Behavioral Aspects of Design Space, Design Issues 13(3) · doi:10.2307/1511937
- Preece, J.: Human Computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley, London (1994)
- Kantowitzm, B.H.: The role of human information processing models in system development. In: Proceedings of the human Factors Society 33rd annual meeting, Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors Society (1989) · DOI
- Guan, Z., Lee, S., Cuddihy, E., Ramey, J.: The validity of the stimulated retrospective think-aloud method as measured by eye tracking. In: Proceeding of CHI 2006 (2006) · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Prokop, M., Pilař, L., & Tichá, I. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20102750 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, B., Dong, Y., Kim, S., & Lee, K.-P.
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 2007
- Pages
- 113-121
- ISSN
- 0302-9743
- 1611-3349
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development of Integrated Analysis System and Tool of Perception, Recognition, and Behavior for Web Usability Test: With Emphasis on Eye-Tracking, Mouse-Tracking, and Retrospective Think Aloud. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-3-540-73287-7_15
- The paper
- Kim, B., Dong, Y., Kim, S., & Lee, K.-P. (2007). Development of Integrated Analysis System and Tool of Perception, Recognition, and Behavior for Web Usability Test: With Emphasis on Eye-Tracking, Mouse-Tracking, and Retrospective Think Aloud. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73287-7_15
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
