Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorLenzner, Timode
dc.contributor.authorKaczmirek, Larsde
dc.contributor.authorGalesic, Mirtade
dc.date.accessioned2014-10-29T10:14:26Z
dc.date.available2014-10-29T10:14:26Z
dc.date.issued2014de
dc.identifier.issn0894-4393de
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/40316
dc.description.abstractThe literature on human-computer interaction consistently stresses the importance of reducing the cognitive effort required by users who interact with a computer in order to improve the experience and enhance usability and comprehension. Applying this perspective to Web surveys, questionnaire designers are advised to strive for layouts that facilitate the response process and reduce the effort required to select an answer. In this paper, we examine whether placing the answer boxes (i.e., radio buttons or check boxes) to the left or to the right of the answer options in closed questions with vertically arranged response categories enhances usability and facilitates responding. First, we discuss a set of opposing principles of how respondents may process these types of questions in Web surveys, some suggesting placing the answer boxes to the left and others suggesting placing them to the right side of the answer options. Second, we report an eye-tracking experiment, which examined whether Web survey responding is best described by one or another of these principles, and consequently whether one of three layouts is preferable in terms of usability: (1) answer boxes to the left of left-aligned answer options, (2) answer boxes to the right of left-aligned answer options, and (3) answer boxes to the right of right-aligned answer options. Our results indicate that the majority of respondents conform to a principle suggesting placing the answer boxes to the left of left-aligned answer options. Moreover, respondents require less cognitive effort (operationalized by response latencies, fixation times, fixation counts, and number of gaze switches between answer options and answer boxes) to select an answer in this layout.en
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.subject.otherWeb survey; questionnaire design; questionnaire layout; visual design effects; eye tracking; usabilityde
dc.titleLeft feels right! A usability study on the position of answer boxes in web surveysde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalSocial Science Computer Review
dc.source.volume32de
dc.publisher.countryUSA
dc.source.issue6de
dc.subject.classozErhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaftende
dc.subject.classozMethods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methodsen
dc.subject.thesozcognitionen
dc.subject.thesozBenutzerforschungde
dc.subject.thesozsociotechnical systemen
dc.subject.thesozsoziotechnisches Systemde
dc.subject.thesozBenutzerfreundlichkeitde
dc.subject.thesozonline surveyen
dc.subject.thesozLeistungde
dc.subject.thesozinteractionen
dc.subject.thesozMensch-Maschine-Systemde
dc.subject.thesozuseren
dc.subject.thesozEntwicklungde
dc.subject.thesozman-machine systemen
dc.subject.thesozquestionnaireen
dc.subject.thesozdevelopmenten
dc.subject.thesozuser-friendlinessen
dc.subject.thesozorientationen
dc.subject.thesozBenutzerde
dc.subject.thesozFragebogende
dc.subject.thesozAntwortverhaltende
dc.subject.thesozOrientierungde
dc.subject.thesozcomputeren
dc.subject.thesozOnline-Befragungde
dc.subject.thesozuser researchen
dc.subject.thesozKognitionde
dc.subject.thesozComputerde
dc.subject.thesozresponse behavioren
dc.subject.thesozachievementen
dc.subject.thesozInteraktionde
dc.subject.thesozsurvey researchen
dc.subject.thesozUmfrageforschungde
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-403160
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine Bearbeitungde
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modificationsen
ssoar.contributor.institutionGESISde
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10035808
internal.identifier.thesoz10052099
internal.identifier.thesoz10046098
internal.identifier.thesoz10037911
internal.identifier.thesoz10038144
internal.identifier.thesoz10040718
internal.identifier.thesoz10036344
internal.identifier.thesoz10035815
internal.identifier.thesoz10036415
internal.identifier.thesoz10040714
internal.identifier.thesoz10042496
internal.identifier.thesoz10049150
internal.identifier.thesoz10037914
internal.identifier.thesoz10038141
internal.identifier.thesoz10040178
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.source.pageinfo743-764de
internal.identifier.classoz10105
internal.identifier.journal645
internal.identifier.document32
dc.rights.sherpaGrüner Verlagde
dc.rights.sherpaGreen Publisheren
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313517532de
dc.description.pubstatusPreprintde
dc.description.pubstatusPreprinten
internal.identifier.sherpa1
internal.identifier.licence3
internal.identifier.pubstatus3
internal.identifier.review1
ssoar.wgl.collectiontruede
internal.pdf.version1.5
internal.pdf.validtrue
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizerCERTAIN
internal.check.languageharmonizerCERTAIN_RETAINED


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record