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

TL;DR

This eye-tracking study investigates how students' visual attention patterns relate to their confidence and accuracy when solving kinematics graph questions, revealing nuanced differences in attention to distractors and correct options.

Contribution

It introduces a detailed eye-tracking analysis of students' visual attention during graph comprehension tests, highlighting how attention patterns differentiate between correct and incorrect responses.

Findings

Higher confidence correlates with shorter fixations on question elements.

Eye-tracking measures do not clearly distinguish correct from incorrect answers overall.

Incorrect responses involve longer fixations on distractors and less on correct options.

Abstract

This study used eye-tracking to capture the students' 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' 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' 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' behavioural level.