Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-08T16:26:13.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eye tracking in usability of electronic chart display and information system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2020

Omer Arslan ,
Oguz Atik  and
Serkan Kahraman
Omer Arslan*
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylul University, Maritime Faculty, Izmir, Turkey.
Oguz Atik
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylul University, Maritime Faculty, Izmir, Turkey.
Serkan Kahraman
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylul University, The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Izmir, Turkey
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: omer.arslan@deu.edu.tr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test eye tracking in studying the usability of electronic chart display and information systems (ECDIS), one of the major components of ships’ bridge navigation systems. The carriage and adequate use of ECDIS on merchant ships is mandated by international regulations to improve maritime safety. The aim of this study is to test eye tracking as an assessment tool for usability of ECDIS. Eye movement data, collected from experienced port pilots operating on three different models of ECDIS, was analysed for the study. Significant differences were found between time to first fixation measurements among three different ECDIS models, as well as differences in heat map visualisations between the participant port pilots and expert users. The results indicate that eye tracking is an effective tool for assessment of the usability of ECDIS. The study, aiming potentially to improve the effectiveness of bridge navigation systems, proposes the integration of eye tracking in research and development of ECDIS, and contributes scientifically to research on eye tracking in marine transportation.

Keywords

ECDISeye trackingusability
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 74 , Issue 3 , May 2021 , pp. 594 - 604
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alacam, O. and Dalci, M. (2009). A Usability Study of Webmaps with Eye Tracking Tool: the Effects of Iconic Representation of Information. Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction HCI 2009: Human-Computer Interaction. New Trends, 12–21. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02574-7_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arslan, O., Zorba, Y. and Svetak, Y. (2018). Fault tree analysis of tanker accidents during loading and unloading operations at the tanker terminals. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 6(1), 3–16. doi:10.5505/jems.2018.29981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asyali, E. (2012). The Role of ECDIS in Improving Situation Awareness. Proceedings of the 13th Annual General Assembly of the IAMU: Expanding Frontiers-Challenges and Opportunities in Maritime Education and Training. Canada.Google Scholar
Atik, O. and Arslan, O. (2019). Use of eye tracking for assessment of electronic navigation competency in maritime training. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 12, 3. doi:10.16910/jemr.12.3.2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakalar, G. and Baggini, M. B. (2016). Bridge officers’ operational experiences with electronic chart display and information systems on ships. Journal of Maritime & Transportation Sciences, 52(1). doi:10.18048/2016.52.03.Google Scholar
Bojko, A. (2013). Eye Tracking the User Experience: A Practical Guide to Research. Brooklyn, New York: Rosenfeld Media.Google Scholar
Bojko, A. and Schumacher, R. M. (2005). Eye Tracking in User Experience Testing: How to Make the Most of it. Proceedings of the UPA 2005, Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
Broster, M. (2016). Type specific ECDIS - explained and uncovered. EMG White Paper WHP001/16. May 2016. ECDIS Ltd.Google Scholar
Dias, F. G., Neves, J. F., Conceição, V. P. and Lobo, V. (2018). Maritime situational awareness, the singular approach of a dual-use navy. Scientific Bulletin of Naval Academy, 21, 203–215.Google Scholar
Duchowski, A. T. (2017). Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice, 3rd ed. London: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumas, J. S. and Redish, J. C. (1993). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Ehmke, C. and Wilson, S. (2007). Identifying Web Usability Problems from Eye-tracking Data. Proceedings of the British HCI Group Annual Conference: People and Computers XXI – HCI But Not As We Know It. Swindon, UK: British Computer Society.Google Scholar
Fitts, P. M., Jones, J. E. and Milton, J. L. (1950). Eye movements of aircraft pilots during instrument landing approaches. Aeronautical Engineering Review, 9(2), 24–29.Google Scholar
Goldberg, J. H. and Kotval, X. P. (1999). Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 24(6), 631–645. doi:10.1016/S0169-8141(98)00068-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grech, M. R., Horberry, T. J. and Koester, T. (2008). Human Factors in the Maritime Domain. Boca Raton, FL: CRC PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, J. (2012). Optimal sample size planning for the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney and Van Elteren tests under cost constraints. Journal of Applied Statistics, 39, 2153–2164. doi:10.1080/02664763.2012.702265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hareide, O. S. and Ostnes, R. (2017). Maritime usability study by analysing eye tracking data. The Journal of Navigation, 70(5), 927–943. doi:10.1017/S0373463317000182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez-Mendez, J. and Munoz-Leiva, F. (2015). What type of online advertising is most effective for etourism 2.0? An eye tracking study based on the characteristics of tourists. Computer in Human Behavior, 50, 818–625. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H. and Van De Weijer, J. (2011). Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Howell, D. C. (2011). Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. 7th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
INTERTANKO. (2017). End user's perspective on ENC and ECDIS. International Association of Independent Tanker Owners.Google Scholar
IMO. (2006). Resolution MSC.232 (82): Adoption of the revised performance standards for electronic chart display and information systems (ECDIS). International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
IMO. (2009). Resolution MSC.282 (86): adoption of amendments to the international convention for the safety of life at sea, 1974, as amended. International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
IMO. (2010). STCW/CONF.2/34. The Manila amendments to the seafarers’ training, certification and watchkeeping (STCW) code. International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
IMO (2017a). MSC.1/Circ.1503/Rev., ECDIS – Guidance for Good Practice, 16 June. International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
IMO. (2017b). STCW.7/Circ.24. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (Stcw), 1978, as amended, 6 February. International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
ISO. (2018). International Standards Organization 9241-11. Ergonomics of Human–System Interaction — Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:enGoogle Scholar
Jacob, R. J. K. and Karn, K. S. (2003). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: ready to deliver the promises (Section commentary). In: Hyona, J., Radach, R. and Deubel, H. (eds.). The Mind's Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movements, Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jie, W. and Xian-Zhong, H. (2008). The Error Chain in Using Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems. Proceeding of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Singapore, 1895–1899.Google Scholar
Lusic, Z., Bakota, M. and Mikelic, Z. (2017). Human Errors in ECDIS Related Accidents. Proceedings of the 7th International Maritime Science Conference. 20–21 April 2017, Croatia. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6c80/fb21dc8f228e698030558a64aabe83c9a46f.pdfGoogle Scholar
Manhartsberger, M. and Zellhofer, N. (2005). Eye Tracking in Usability Research: What Users Really See. Proceedings of the 1st Usability Symposium. HCI&UE Workgroup, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Manjeshwar, S. (2014). Building bridges for best practice. The Navigator (07), 6–7. Retrieved from https://www.nautinst.org/uploads/assets/uploaded/9035e6d8-7886-49f1-994501926c5f5e6d.pdf.Google Scholar
Markopoulos, P. and Bekker, M. M. (2002). How to Compare Usability Testing Methods with Children Participants. Proceedings of the International Workshop ‘Interaction Design and Children’, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 28–29 August, 2002, 153–158.Google Scholar
Neta, M., Tong, T. T., Rosen, M. L., Enersen, A., Kim, M. J. and Dodd, M. D. (2017). All in the first glance: first fixation predicts individual differences in valence bias. Cognition and Emotion, 31(4), 772–780. doi:10.1080/02699931.2016.1152231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. New York: Academic Press, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nivvedan, S. (2014). Literature survey on eye-tracking. Retrieved from: http://www.cfilt.iitb.ac.in/re-sources/surveys/eye-tracking-nivvedan-may14.pdf.Google Scholar
Obrist, M., Bernhaupt, R., Beck, E. and Tscheligi, M. (2007). Focusing on elderly: An iTV usability evaluation study with eye-tracking. In: Cesar, P., Chorianopoulos, K., and Jensen, J.F. (eds.). Interactive TV: A Shared Experience. EuroITV 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4471. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72559-6_8.Google Scholar
Poole, A. and Ball, L. J. (2006). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Current status and future prospects. In Ghaoui, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference, 211–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothblum, A. (2002). Human error and marine safety. U.S Coast Guard Research & Development Center.Google Scholar
Rubin, J. and Chisnell, D. (2008). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests. 2nd ed. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
Russell, M. C. (2005). Hotspots and hyperlinks: Using eye-tracking to supplement usability testing. Usability News, 7(2), 1–11.Google Scholar
Sevgili, C., Kundakci, B. and Atik, O. (2020). ECDIS ile sefer planlama sürecinde insan güvenilirliği analisi. Türkiye İçin Deniscilik Stratejileri. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.Google Scholar
Sharp, H., Preece, J. A. and Rogers, Y. A. (2015). Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
Shipowners. (2015). The shipowners club. Caution on the unauthorised and incorrect use of ECDIS.Google Scholar
Standard. (2015). The Standard Club. Standard Safety special edition: ECDIS assisted grounding. The Standard Club.Google Scholar
Tobii Pro. (2020). Understanding Pro Lab's eye tracking metrics. Retrieved from; https://www.tobiipro.com/learn-and-support/learn/steps-in-an-eye-tracking-study/data/understanding-Pro-Labs-eye-tracking-metrics/Google Scholar
Tobii Pro AB. (2020). Tobii Pro Lab User's Manual (Version 1.145). Retrieved from; https://www.tobiipro.com/siteassets/tobii-pro/user-manuals/Tobii-Pro-Lab-User-Manual/?v=1.145Google Scholar
Turna, I. and Ozturk, O. B. (2019). A causative analysis on ECDIS-related grounding accidents. Ships and Offshore Structures. doi:10.1080/17445302.2019.1682919.Google Scholar
UNCTAD. (2019). Review of Maritime Transport 2019. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
Van Orden, K. F., Jung, T. P. and Makeig, S. (2000). Combined eye activity measures accurately estimates changes in sustained visual task performance. Biological Psychology, 52(3), 221–240. doi:10.1016/s0301-0511(99)00043-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weintrit, A. (2009). The Electronic Chart Display and Information Sytem (ECDIS) An Operational Handbook. Leiden: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu Zhang, X., Yin, Y., Yi Cheng, J., Sun, X. and Hong Xiang, R. (2011). The marine safety simulation based electronic chart display and information system. Abstract and Applied Analysis. doi:10.1155/2011/586038Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. W. (2003). A warning about the large-sample Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test: earlier studies conducted in structured interviews. Understanding Statistics, 2(4), 267–280. doi:10.1207/S15328031US0204_03CrossRefGoogle Scholar