[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Individual differences and behavioral metrics involved in modeling web navigation

  • LONG PAPER
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an empirical study aiming at investigating individual differences and behavioral metrics involved in modeling web navigation. Factors that have an influence on web navigation behavior were identified with the aid of task analysis, and their relevance in predicting task outcomes (performance, satisfaction, perceived disorientation) was tested with the aid of multiple regression analysis. Several types of navigation metrics were calculated based on web logging data and used as indicators of user characteristics and task outcomes. Results show that spatial-semantic cognitive mechanisms seem to be crucial in adequately performing web navigation tasks. The fact that user characteristics and task outcomes can be estimated with reasonable accuracy based on navigation metrics suggests the possibility of building adaptive navigation support in web applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lazar J (2003) The World Wide Web. In: Jacko J, Sears A (eds) The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 714–730

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ivory M, Hearst M (2001) State of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Comput Surveys 33(4):1–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Conklin J (1987) Hypertext: an introduction and survey. IEEE Comput Mag 20(9):17–41

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eveland WP Jr, Dunwoody S (1998) Users and navigation patterns of a science World Wide Web site for the public. Public Understand Sci 7:285–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. MacGregor S (1999) Hypermedia navigation profiles: cognitive characteristics and information processing strategies. J Educ Comput Res 20(2):189–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Draper SW (1999) Supporting use, learning, and education. J comput documen 23(2):19–24

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen C (2001) Individual differences in a spatial-semantic virtual environment. J Am Soc Inform Sci 51(6):529–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stanney KM, Salvendy G (1995) Information visualization; assisting low spatial individuals with information access tasks through the use of visual mediators. Ergonomics 38(6):1184–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Westerman SJ (1995) Computerized information retrieval: individual differences in the use of spatial vs nonspatial navigational information. Perceptual Motor Skills 81:771–786

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sjolinder M (1998) Individual differences in spatial cognition and hypermedia navigation. In: Towards a framework for design and evaluation of navigation in electronic spaces. Swedish Institute of Computer Science

  11. Neerincx MA, Pemberton S, Lindenberg J (1999) U-WISH Web usability: methods, guidelines and support interfaces. TNO Human Factors Research Institute, Soesterberg

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pirolli P, Fu WT (2003) SNIF-ACT: a model of information foraging on the World Wide Web http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/pirolli03snifact.html

  13. Byrne MD (2003) Cognitive Architecture. In: Jacko J, Sears A (eds) The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 97–117

    Google Scholar 

  14. Card SK, Pirolli P, Van Der Wege M, Morrison JB, Reeder RW, Schraedley PK, Boshart J (2001) Information scent as a driver of web behavior graphs: results of a protocol analysis method for web usability. SIGCHI’01. ACM Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kieras DE, Meyer DE (1997) An overview of the EPIC architecture for cognition and performance with application to human-computer interaction. Hum Comput Interact 12:391–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kitajima M, Blackmon MH, Polson PG (2000) A comprehension-based model of web navigation and its application to web usability analysis, in people and computers XIV. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 357–373

    Google Scholar 

  17. Landauer TK, Foltz PW, Laham D (1998) Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Process 25:259–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Blackmon MH et al (2002) Cognitive walkthrough for the Web. In: CHI 2002. ACM, Minneapolis

  19. Jameson A (2003) Adaptive interfaces and agents. In: Jacko J, Sears A (eds) The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 305–330

    Google Scholar 

  20. Morrison JB, Pirolli P, Card SK (2000) A taxonomic analysis of what World Wide Web activities significantly impact people’s decisions and actions. UIR Technical report UIR-R-2000–17, Xerox PARC

  21. Pirolli P, Card SK (1999) Information foraging. Psychological Rev 106(4):643–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. ISO 9241 - 11 Ergonomic requirements for office work with VDT’s—guidance on usability

  23. Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge university press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  24. van Oostendorp H, Walbeehm BJ (1995) Towards modelling exploratory learning in the context of direct manipulation interfaces. Interact Comput 7(1):3–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Herder E, Van Dijk B (2004) Site structure and user navigation: models, measures and methods. In: Chen SY, Magoulas GD (eds) Adaptable and Adaptive Hypermedia Systems. Idea Group Publishing, pp 19–34

    Google Scholar 

  26. Botafogo RA, Rivlin E, Shneiderman B (1992) Structural analysis of hypertexts: identifying hierarchies and useful metrics. ACM Trans Inform Syst 10(2):142–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hilgard ER (1980) The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection, and conation. J Histo Behav Sci 16:107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Atman KS (1982) The conation phenomenon. University of Pittsburgh School of Education, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hershberger WAE (1989) Volitional action: conation and control. Advances in Psychology, vol 62. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam

  30. Wechsler D (1950) Cognitive, conative, and non-intellective intelligence. Am Psychol 5:78–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Emmons R (1986) Personal strivings: an approach to personality and subjective well-being. J Personal Soc Psychol 51:1058–1068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mischel W (1996) From good intentions to willpower. In: Gollwitzer P, Bargh J (eds) The psychology of action. Guilford press, New York, pp 197–218

    Google Scholar 

  33. Huitt W (1999) Conation as an important factor of mind. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta State University, Valdosta

    Google Scholar 

  34. Linderholm T (2002) Predictive inference generation as a function of working memory capacity and causal text constraints. Discour Process 34(3):259–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pettijohn T (2002) Locus of control scale. Web Survey

    Google Scholar 

  36. Peak Performance, Brain Dominance Questionnaire (2002) http://www.glencoe.com/ps/peak/selfassess/integrate/

  37. Egger FN (2003) From interactions to tranzactions: designing the trust experience for business-to-consumer electronic commerce. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven

    Google Scholar 

  38. Miron EAM (2003) Analyzing the role of students’ goal orientation during their interaction with an ILE. In: HCT2003—the 7th human centred technology postgraduate workshop. HCT, Falmer, Brighton

  39. Compeau DR, Higgins CA (1995) Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quart 19(2):189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Wammi, Web Usability Questionnaire. http://www.wammi.com/

  41. Sumi, The Software Usability Measurement Inventory. http://www.ucc.ie/hfrg/questionnaires/sumi/

  42. Ahuja JS, Webster J (2001) Perceived disorientation: an examination of a new measure to assess web design effectiveness. Interact Comput 14(1):15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Cohen J (19992) A power primer. Psycholo Bull 112(1):155–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Cockburn A, McKenzie B (2001) What do web users do? An empirical analysis of web use. Int J Hum Comput Stud 54(6):903–922

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Rouet JF, Ros C, Jegou G, Metta S (2003) Locating relevant categories in web menues: effects of menu structure, aging and task complexity, in human-centred computing. Cognitive, Social and Ergonomic Aspects. In: Harris D, Duffy V, Smith M, Stephanidis C (eds) HCI International 2003—Conference Proceedings. Crete, Greece, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, pp 547–551

  46. Juvina I, van Oostendorp H (2003) Human Factors in web-assisted personal finance. Human-centred computing. Cognitive, social and ergonomic aspects. In: Harris D, Duffy V, Smith M, Stephanidis C (eds) HCI International 2003—Conference Proceedings. Crete, Greece. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, 3:477–481

  47. Takeishi A (2001) Bridging inter- and intra-firm boundaries: management of supplier involvement in automobile product development. Strategic Manage J 22(5):03–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tucker P, Warr P (1996) Intelligence, elementary cognitive components, and cognitive styles as predictors of complex task performance. Personal Individual Differences 21(1):91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study presented in this paper was conducted in collaboration with Eelco Herder and Betsy van Dijk from Twente University, The Netherlands. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Content and Knowledge Engineering Institute of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584, Utrecht, CH, The Netherlands

    Ion Juvina & Herre van Oostendorp

Authors
  1. Ion Juvina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Herre van Oostendorp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ion Juvina.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Juvina, I., Oostendorp, H.v. Individual differences and behavioral metrics involved in modeling web navigation. Univ Access Inf Soc 4, 258–269 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-005-0007-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-005-0007-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation