The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The validity of the stimulated retrospective think-aloud method as measured by eye tracking
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
“In addition, thinking aloud probably affects the user's task performance (Nielsen et al., 2002;van Someren, Barnard, & Sandberg, 1994;Guan, Lee, Cuddihy, & Ramey, 2006).”
From Gaze Path Stimulation in Retrospective Think-Aloud (2008) · cites this paper as Guan, Lee, Cuddihy, & Ramey, 2006
In the citing paper
“According to their research, RTA provided a valid account of what people attended to in completing tasks, the technique had low risk of introducing fabrications (reports of events that in fact did not occur), and its validity was unaffected by task complexity.”
From Gaze Path Stimulation in Retrospective Think-Aloud (2008) · cites this paper as Guan et al. (2006)
In the citing paper
“Despite all the problems in RTA, Guan et al. (2006) found RTA to be valid and reliable when they compared participants' retrospective verbalizations with a captured record of their eye movements during the test.”
From Gaze Path Stimulation in Retrospective Think-Aloud (2008) · cites this paper as Guan et al. (2006)
In the citing paper
“Nevertheless, it has also limitations like forgetting information or omitting its interpretation [55,56,58,67] and post-rationalization or fabrication of thoughts [68,69,70].”
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 [70]
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 [70]
4 more claims about this paper
Create a free account to see every claim other papers make about this one.
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
Task complexity: Definition of the construct
Wood, R. E. (1986) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0 · Cited by 1,393 · cited 1×
“For our task design we borrowed classic concepts from Campbell [4] and Wood [33] to develop a combined definition of task complexity in problem-solving tasks: (1) information load: amount of information the subject has to retain; (2) information diversity: dimensions of information that need to be accounted for; (3) i…”
Method
Research works printed but not linked: 32
- 10.1145/108844.108846 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193129003401720 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0740-8188(00)00051-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5465/amr.1988.4306775 · doi:10.5465/amr.1988.4306775 · Paper page
- Capra , M.G. Contemporaneous versus Retrospective User-Reported Critical Incidents in Usability Evaluation . In Proc. of Human Factors Society, 46 th Annual Meeting. (2002) , 1973--1977. Capra, M.G. Contemporaneous versus Retrospective User-Reported Critical Incidents in Usability Evaluation. In Proc. of Human Factors Society, 46 th Annual Meeting. (2002), 1973--1977.
- 10.1145/365024.365331 · DOI
- 10.1145/1054972.1055064 · DOI
- Ericsson , K.A. & H.A. Simon , Protocol analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. 1993: Cambridge , MA : MIT Press . Ericsson, K.A.&H.A. Simon, Protocol analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. 1993: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Gapra , M.G. Comtemporaneous versus Retrospective User-reported Critical Incidents in Usability Evaluation . In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46th Annual Meeting. (2002) , 1973--1977. Gapra, M.G. Comtemporaneous versus Retrospective User-reported Critical Incidents in Usability Evaluation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46th Annual Meeting. (2002), 1973--1977.
- 10.1037/0278-7393.3.3.305 · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.3.3.305
- Gero , J.S. & H. -h. Tang . Differences between retrospective and concurrent protocols in revealing the process-oriented aspects of the design process . Design Studies. 21 , 3 ( 2001 ), 283--295. Gero, J.S.&H.-h. Tang. Differences between retrospective and concurrent protocols in revealing the process-oriented aspects of the design process. Design Studies. 21,3 (2001), 283--295.
- Goldberg , J.H. & A.M. Wichansky , Eye tracking in usability evlauation: A practitioner's guide ., in The Mind's Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movements , R. Radach, et al., Editors.( 2003 ), Elsevier Science : Oxford . 493--516. Goldberg, J.H.&A.M. Wichansky, Eye tracking in usability evlauation: A practitioner's guide., in The Mind's Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movements, R. Radach, et al., Editors.(2003), Elsevier Science: Oxford. 493--516.
- 10.1207/s15327051hci1303_2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/268986.268988 · DOI
- Kjeldskov , J. & M.B. Skov . Creating Realistic Laboratory Settings: Comparative Studies of Three Think aloud Usability Evaluations of a Mobile System . In Proc. of the 9th IFIP TC13 INTERACT 2003 . ( 2003 ), 663 -- 670. Kjeldskov, J.&M.B. Skov. Creating Realistic Laboratory Settings: Comparative Studies of Three Think aloud Usability Evaluations of a Mobile System. In Proc. of the 9th IFIP TC13 INTERACT 2003. (2003), 663 -- 670.
- 10.1145/1054972.1054979 · DOI
- Nielson , J. , Usability Engineering. 1993: Cambridge , MA : AP Professional . Nielson, J., Usability Engineering. 1993: Cambridge, MA: AP Professional.
- 10.1177/154193129503900401 · DOI
- Preece J. Human-Computer Interaction. 1994: Addison-Wesley England. Preece J. Human-Computer Interaction. 1994: Addison-Wesley England.
- Preece J. et al. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. 2002: John Wiley & Sons. Preece J. et al. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. 2002: John Wiley & Sons. · DOI
- Ramey , J. , et al. , Adaptation of an Ethnographic Method for Investigation the Task Domain in Diagnostic Radiology , in A Field Methods Casebook for Software Design, e . D. Wixon and J. Ramey, Editor.( 1996 ), John Wiley and Sons . 1--15. Ramey, J., et al., Adaptation of an Ethnographic Method for Investigation the Task Domain in Diagnostic Radiology, in A Field Methods Casebook for Software Design, e. D. Wixon and J. Ramey, Editor.(1996), John Wiley and Sons. 1--15.
- 10.1177/154193129003401719 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/191666.191758 · doi:10.1145/191666.191758
- 10.3758/BF03202637 · DOI · Paper page
- Sankoff , D. & J.B. Kruskal , An overview of sequence comparison , in Time Warps, String Edits, and Macro-Molecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison.(1983) , Addison-Wesley . Sankoff, D.&J.B. Kruskal, An overview of sequence comparison, in Time Warps, String Edits, and Macro-Molecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison.(1983), Addison-Wesley.
- 10.1145/634067.634256 · DOI
- 10.1006/ijhc.2001.0470 · DOI
- 10.1145/257089.257255 · DOI
- 10.1145/634067.634238 · doi:10.1145/634067.634238
- 10.1080/0044929031000 · DOI · Paper page
- Waes , L.V . Thinking Aloud as a Method for Testing the Usability of Websites: The influence of Task Variation on the Evaluation of Hypertext . IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 43 , 3 ( 2000 ), 279--291. Waes, L.V. Thinking Aloud as a Method for Testing the Usability of Websites: The influence of Task Variation on the Evaluation of Hypertext. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 43,3 (2000), 279--291.
- Williams , T.R. , et al. Does Isolating a Visual Element Call Attention to It? Results of an Eye-tracking Investigation of the Effects of Isolation on Emphasis . Technical Communication. 52 , 1 ( 2005 ), 21--26. Williams, T.R., et al. Does Isolating a Visual Element Call Attention to It? Results of an Eye-tracking Investigation of the Effects of Isolation on Emphasis. Technical Communication. 52,1 (2005), 21--26.
Cited by
Gaze Path Stimulation in Retrospective Think-Aloud
Hyrskykari, A., Ovaska, S., Majaranta, P., Räihä, K.-J., & Lehtinen, M. (2008) · Journal of Eye Movement Research · doi:10.16910/jemr.2.4.5 · Cited by 118
Circle of Trust: A New Approach to Mobile Online Safety for Families
Ghosh, A. K., Hughes, C. E., & Wisniewski, P. J. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376747 · Cited by 75
Akter, M., Godfrey, A. J., Kropczynski, J., Lipford, H. R., & Wisniewski, P. J. (2022) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3512904 · Cited by 71
Asan, O., & Yang, Y. (2015) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/humanfactors.4062 · Cited by 66
Prokop, M., Pilař, L., & Tichá, I. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20102750 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Guan, Z., Lee, S., Cuddihy, E., & Ramey, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington, Seattle (UW), Seattle, WA
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2006-04-22
- Pages
- 1253-1262
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 1
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: The validity of the stimulated retrospective think-aloud method as measured by eye tracking. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1124772.1124961
- The paper
- Guan, Z., Lee, S., Cuddihy, E., & Ramey, J. (2006). The validity of the stimulated retrospective think-aloud method as measured by eye tracking. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124961
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.
