The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search
Abstract
Web search services are among the most heavily used applications on the World Wide Web. Perhaps because search is used in such a huge variety of tasks and contexts, the user interface must strike a careful balance to meet all user needs. We describe a study that used eye tracking methodologies to explore the effects of changes in the presentation of search results. We found that adding information to the contextual snippet significantly improved performance for informational tasks but degraded performance for navigational tasks. We discuss possible reasons for this difference and the design implications for better presentation of search results.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
Broder, A. (2002) · ACM SIGIR Forum · doi:10.1145/792550.792552 · Cited by 1,944
Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback
Joachims, T., Granka, L., Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., & Gay, G. (2005) · Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval · doi:10.1145/1076034.1076063 · Cited by 1,408
Faceted metadata for image search and browsing
Yee, K.-P., Swearingen, K., Li, K., & Hearst, M. A. (2003) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/642611.642681 · Cited by 910
Understanding user goals in web search
Rose, D. E., & Levinson, D. (2004) · Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/988672.988675 · Cited by 563
The perfect search engine is not enough
Teevan, J. B., Alvarado, C., Ackerman, M. S., & Karger, D. R. (2004) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/985692.985745 · Cited by 563
Using information scent to model user information needs and actions and the Web
Ed, H., Pirolli, P. L. T., Chen, K., & Pitkow, J. E. (2001) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/365024.365325 · Cited by 418
Automatic identification of user goals in Web search
Lee, U., Liu, Z., & Cho, J. J. (2005) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/1060745.1060804 · Cited by 399
Patterns of Search: Analyzing and Modeling Web Query Refinement
Lau, T. A., & Horvitz, E. (1999) · Courses and lectures · doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-2490-1_12 · Cited by 254
The influence of task and gender on search and evaluation behavior using Google
Lorigo, L., Pan, B., Hembrooke, H. A., Joachims, T., Granka, L. A., & Gay, G. K. (2005) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.10.001 · Cited by 252
An eye tracking study of the effect of target rank on web search
Guan, Z., & Cutrell, E. B. (2007) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1240624.1240691 · Cited by 243
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- 10.5555/317328.317340 · DOI
- 10.1002/asi.v56:9 · DOI
- Rele , R.S. and Duchowski , A.T . Using eye tracking to evaluate alternate search results interfaces . In Proc. HFES,49th Annual Meeting ( 2005 ). Rele, R.S. and Duchowski, A.T. Using eye tracking to evaluate alternate search results interfaces. In Proc. HFES,49th Annual Meeting (2005).
- 10.1002/asi.v57:6 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Measuring personalization of web search
Hannak, A., Sapiezynski, P., Molavi Kakhki, A., Krishnamurthy, B., Lazer, D., Mislove, A., & Wilson, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/2488388.2488435 · Cited by 396
Huang, J. J. S., White, R. W., & Dumais, S. (2011) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1978942.1979125 · Cited by 270
Understanding PubMed(R) user search behavior through log analysis
Islamaj Dogan, R., Murray, G. C., Neveol, A., & Lu, Z. (2009) · Database · doi:10.1093/database/bap018 · Cited by 265
What do you see when you're surfing?
Buscher, G., Cutrell, E. B., & Morris, M. R. (2009) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1518701.1518705 · Cited by 254
Self-citationCROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation
von Hippel, E., & von Krogh, G. (2015) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2015.1023 · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Cutrell, E., & Guan, Z.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- ORCID
- Cutrell, Edward
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2007-04-29
- Pages
- 407-416
- OpenAlex
- W2004089651
- Cited by
- 460
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 38
- FWCI
- 19.36
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
- Keywords
- web search, search result presentation, eye tracking, user interface design
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
