Paper detail

Visual attention while solving the test of understanding graphs in kinematics: An eye-tracking analysis

This study used eye-tracking to capture the students&#39; visual attention while taking the test of understanding graphs in kinematics (TUG-K). A total of N = 115 upper-secondary-level students from Germany and Switzerland took the 26-item multiple-choice instrument after learning about kinematics graphs in the regular classroom. Besides choosing the correct alternative among research-based distractors, the students were required to judge their response confidence for each question. The items were presented sequentially on a computer screen equipped with a remote eye tracker, resulting in a set of approx. 3000 paired responses (accuracy and confidence) and about 40 hours of eye movementdata (approx. 500.000 fixations). The analysis of students&#39; visual attention related to the item stems (questions) and the item options reveal that high response confidence is correlated with shorter visit duration on both elements of the items. While the students&#39; response accuracy and their response confidence are highly correlated on the score level, r(115) = 0.63, p < 0.001, the eye-tracking measures do not sufficiently discriminate between correct and incorrect responses. However, a more fine-grained analysis of visual attention based on different answer options reveals a significant discrimination between correct and incorrect answers in terms of an interaction effect: Incorrect responses are associated with longer visit durations on strong distractors and less time spent on correct options while correct responses show the opposite trend. Outcomes of this study provide new insights into the validation of concept inventories based on students&#39; behavioural level.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.