<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Using Eye Tracking and Electroencephalography to assess and evaluate students' cognitive dimensions</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Efi A. Nisiforou</string-name>
          <email>efi.nisiforou@cut.ac.cy</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Department of Multimedia and Graphic Arts Cyprus University of Technology</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>79</fpage>
      <lpage>86</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Field dependence-independence (FD/FI) is an important dimension of cognitive styles. The current thesis seeks to identify individuals' level of field independence during visual stimulus tasks processing. It intends to examine brain signals with the use of the EEG neuroimaging method and the eye tracking device. Specifically, it aims to value the relationship between the Hidden Figure Test (HFT) scores, the Eye Tracking metrics and the EEG brain signals device by examine whether and how humans' cognitive behaviour (cognitive abilities) can be identified and clarified through the two cutting edge technologies. Additionally, it seeks to investigate if differences exist among the cognitive groups on a sample of students retrieved from a Public University in Cyprus. The progress achieved so far is outlined and further agenda of the work-in-progress is addressed.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>FDI dimension</kwd>
        <kwd>higher education</kwd>
        <kwd>eye-tracking</kwd>
        <kwd>EEG</kwd>
        <kwd>cognitive abilities</kwd>
        <kwd>visual stimuli</kwd>
        <kwd>hidden figures test</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        The field of the applied cognitive dimensions is complex and challenging.
Researchers working in the context of cognitive load theory [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] have been concerned
with analyzing the effects of cognitive load on learning and devising strategies and
tools to help learners maintain an optimal level of load in various learning contexts.
As a consequence, measurement of cognitive dimension plays a key role in CLT
research [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The visual appearance of interactive systems, such as Web pages and e-learning
environments, tends to convey more information than we imagine. With the use of
eye tracking technology and electroencephalography (EEG) as measures of noticing
users' cognitive ability during visual processing, we can further enrich our knowledge
in e-learning and adaptive environments design, by understanding how learners of
different cognitive types interact within the same tasks. Cognitive style data is being
incorporated into adaptive e-learning systems for the development of personalized
user models. The link between eye tracking and cognitive modeling is an extremely
intuitive and fruitful area of research. It is important therefore to understand precisely
what the eyes and the brain reveal in order to model human behaviour by designing
suitable learning environments based on the assumption that individuals learn
differently. In general, the research work seeks to examine how cognitive abilities
can be identified through the implementation of cutting edge technologies such as
EEG and Eye Tracking.</p>
      <p>Additionally, a challenge of this arena is to conduct research that compares
different metrics that will provide a more spherical understanding on the phenomenon
under investigation. There is a need to develop a holistic model of learning that will
integrate all the cognitive dimensions. Thus, the undertaken study intends to provide
an in depth understanding of the relation between cognitive abilities and brain
cognitive process.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Goal of the study</title>
      <p>The study is an exploratory research that seeks to examine whether cognitive abilities
can be identified, through the implementation of EEG and Eye Tracking technologies.
This research study is of great importance as it will illustrate what happens to the
human brain as it receives visual information.</p>
      <p>The main focus of the proposed thesis is to evaluate user's cognitive abilities
identification based on the Field Dependent-Independent classification and examine new
possibilities for validating human cognitive behaviour. Therefore the overall goal is to
examine how cognitive abilities can be identified through EEG and Eye tracking
metrics.</p>
      <p>Specifically, it seeks to investigate the FDI dimension on the achievement of
different instructional objectives in a self-paced and computer-based setting for
developing a learning profile model based on the brain signals (EEG) and the eye-movement
behaviour of which HCI and BCI fields can put into practice. We assert that knowing
how cognitive abilities can be detected through eye tracking technology we can lead
to solutions that improve users' Web experiences.</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>The research study addresses the following key aspects:</title>
        <p>1. Explore the potential of EEG and eye tracking in assessing learners cognitive
dimensions as new proposed methods of measurement.
2. Develop a learning profile framework based on users’ cognitive dimensions
3. Explore and Compare the results revealed form the two different BCI and HCI
devices.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Therefore, the research questions that shaped the PhD study are:</title>
        <p>1. Do differences exist between the three cognitive groups FD, FN and FI with regard
to tasks time completion?
2. Is there a significant correlation between the eye tracker metrics and the Hidden
Figure Test scores?
3. Is there a significant correlation between the results revealed from the
electroencephalography (EEG) measures regarding participants’ cognitive dimensions and
the eye tracking metrics?
4. Can the developed learning profile model handle the cognitive load based on the
insights of the EEG and Eye-tracking tools?
3
3.1</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Theoretical background</title>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Cognitive abilities - Field dependence/ independence dimension</title>
        <p>
          The field dependence-independence (FDI) is among the most broadly studied of the
variety of cognitive style dimensions appearing in the literature and especially in the
educational technology field [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ]. FDI is one of those cognitive style theories which is
acknowledged in a number of studies on instructional effectiveness (e.g. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ] [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ] [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ]).
These dimensions are formed based on the individual's reliance on the context to
extract specific meaning and describe two contrasting ways of processing information;
the field-dependent (FD) and field-independent (FI) individuals’ distinct approach.
Specifically, some individuals are classified as Field Dependent (FD) and other
individuals are categorized as Field Independent (FI). Individuals who fall in the middle
of the continuum are determined as Field-Mixed (FM) or Field-Neutral. The key
difference between FD and FI learners is visual perceptiveness [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
          ]. FD learners, who are
asked to identify a simple geometric figure [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
          ] that is embedded in a complex figure,
will take longer to detect the simple figure than FI learners, or they may not be able to
find it at all. Researchers have concluded that there is something about the ways
human brains function that leads to how people learn and process information [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ].
Additionally, existing works indicate the importance in assessing the cognitive load
during learning activities in the process of capturing the cognitive state of learners [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
          ]
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ] [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ] [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ] [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ]. Another interested study [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
          ] examined the learning process in
relation to the brain. Much of the research on FD-I has focused on examining the
effects of FD-I on learners’ computer performance [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
          ]. A study [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
          ] demonstrated
cognitive-style based differences in Web searching tasks. It is important to note that
most studies rely heavily on the prior completion of questionnaires by system users.
Since the completion of questionnaires can be time consuming for users, potentially
improving the measurement methods of users’ cognitive load is meaningful.
3.2
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Eye Tracking device</title>
        <p>
          Cognitive and semantic aspects of a stimulus play an important role in visual and
scene perception [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
          ]. Eye movements are driven by properties of the visual world
and processes in a person’s mind [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
          ]. Eye tracking and usability evaluation studies
try to investigate and understand user behavior [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
          ] with an increasing interest to Web
page behavior [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
          ]. A general conclusion is that user interaction depends on the visual
factors (nearby visual features) and scene semantics (general knowledge about the
scene layout). Understanding how this in-formation and cognitive overload affects
user perception and Web interaction can lead to solutions that improve users’ Web
experience. We believe that an initial step towards this goal is to understand Web
page visual perception and relate a user’s implicit understanding of Web page visual
complexity with its layout. The eye tracking measures aid the enhancement of
usability as they can give information on issues such as cognitive activity [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
          ]. Moreover,
Van Gog and Scheiter [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
          ] mentioned that the findings of their study can contribute in
multimedia research by using eye tracking to investigate how diverse design
interventions (e.g., spoken vs. written text) affect processing of complex visual presentations.
Yesilada et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
          ] used eye tracking to investigate users’ evaluation style while they
were searching different Web engines. In Germanakos et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
          ] eye tracking
measurements revealed statistically significant differences between different types of
learners, whereas imagers focus on visual content, verbalizers on text and
intermediates placed in between the other two types. The idea that user’ features such as
cognitive abilities and personality are affecting the effectiveness of information
visualization techniques is continuously growing. An eye tracking study conducted by Toker et
al [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
          ] investigated the relationship between such characteristics and fine-grained user
attention patterns. Their findings revealed that user’s cognitive abilities such as
perceptual speed and verbal working memory have a significant impact on gaze behavior
in terms of task difficulty and visualization type.
4
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Design of the research</title>
      <p>In pursuit of answering the aforementioned research questions of the thesis, three
studies were designed and shape the structure of the proposed thesis. The data
revealed from the two research instruments will be thereafter compared giving more
reliable results of the phenomenon under investigation. It is of great importance that
participants’ input show similar reactivity pattern in the EEG, the Eye tracking and
the reliable tool used; the Hidden Figures Test, in order for the findings to validate the
importance of the research. The following sections shape the progress achieved so far
and sketch the future research dimensions of the proposed study.
4.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Study 1 - Using Eye tracking in assessing learners’ cognitive dimensions</title>
        <sec id="sec-4-1-1">
          <title>Experimental Set up.</title>
          <p>Different visual-stimulus tasks were employed in the current experimental
eyetracking study. The cognitive processes engaged in the visual attention study included
two visual-stimuli tasks; the embedded shapes and the hidden faces.</p>
          <p>
            The target audience of the study was consisted of a number of normal and healthy
students recruited from a department in a public University in Cyprus. The
participants were initially categorized into FD, FI and FN/FM learners on their
performances on the Hidden Figures Test, and were then assigned to the experiment. FDI was
assessed using the Hidden Figures Test (HFT) from the Educational Testing Services
kit for cognitive factors [
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>
            ] designed by [
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>
            ], that measures the level of an
individual’s field dependence. The HFT consists of 32 questions divided equally into two
parts and scores ranged from 1 to 31 (max =32 points). It presents five simple figures
were learners had to identify which one of these simple figures is embedded in a more
complex figure. The cut-off scores were decided taking into consideration how other
researchers determined the cut-off scores in their studies [
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>
            ] [
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>
            ], so that meaningful
comparative studies could be made in the future. Individuals who scored 10 or lower
were categorized as FD, those who scored from 11 to 17 were classified as FM or FN,
and those who scored from 18 to 31 as FI. The current phase of the PhD study is
divided into two sections: a) Hidden figures test (HFT) [
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>
            ], in order to access
individuals’ level of field independence and b) eye movements’ analysis through the use of
the iViewX model of the eye-tracking device, in assessing their cognitive abilities.
The second section was conducted in two parts: Visual Stimulus - Embedded shapes;
and Visual Stimulus – Hidden Faces, in order to explore participants’ visual attention
and calculate the level of field independence. The design of the instrument was
inspired by the Hidden Figures Test.
          </p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Preliminary Results.</title>
        <p>The preliminary findings of the study are discussed with respect on how FD, FM,
and FI learners interact with the affordances of the proposed tools in order to answer a
given task and therefore come up with data that indicate their level of field
independence as HFT did. The quantitative data were analyzed with the aid of the Be Gaze 3.1
Software and basically focused on heatmap and scan path analysis. The results of the
study detected individuals’ visual style preferences based on the FD/ FI cognitive
dimension. Furthermore, the eye tracking and stimulated data also suggest that
although learners engage in similar environments of viewing activity, they tend to
demonstrate different cognitive traits. The results of the two different tools with
regard to the participants’ cognitive ability were significantly correlated (p=0.002&lt;0.01
p = .002, Cramér’s V= .721). Additionally, the findings suggest that cognitive ability
classification may be predicted by the time completion of each task. During the first
task of the visual stimuli condition – embedded shapes, the performance of
individuals classified as FI was significantly faster in time completion, indicating more
accurately the correct response compared to the FD group. A comparison of a set of
hotspots demonstrates the difference between Field Independent and Field Dependent.
The FD needed more time in finding the hidden face, than the FI did, and there were
times that they could not detect it at all.</p>
        <p>The results of the current PhD study stage revealed the effectiveness and the
potential of the eye tracker technology and the designed stimulus in assessing learners’
cognitive dimensions since HFT validated the data retrieved from the eye tracker
results. The time tracking varies among the participants, thus time might play an
important additional factor in detecting subjects’ cognitive traits through a computer
based environment. This result was statistically examined indicating significant
differences between the FD and FI cognitive cohorts.</p>
        <p>Currently we are analyzing data collected from running the same study with a
wider population. We believe that these preliminary and promising results will be
verified. The data will be analysed and presented by the time of the conference.
5.1</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Future dimensions</title>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>Study 2 - Using EEG in assessing learners’ cognitive dimensions</title>
        <p>Based on the results of the previous study, this research will utilize EEG as a device
in detecting users’ cognitive dimensions. The most efficient and reliable designed
visual tool in assessing participants’ cognitive dimensions used in study 1 will be
employed as the experimental environment of this study. This part of the research is
also aiming to identify learners’ level of field independence as a mean to verify and
strengthen the preliminary results achieved so far.
5.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-2">
        <title>Study 3-Comparison of the cutting-edge technologies findings in assessing learners’ cognitive dimensions</title>
        <p>The final stage of the thesis relies on a comparison study that seeks to triangulate the
data that will be retrieved from the two technologies (Eye tracking and EEG devices).
The objective of this comparison study is to suggest and develop a learning profiling
model based on individuals’ cognitive dimensions. Additionally, instructors,
designers, researchers, educators’ specialized in the Human Computer Interaction
(HCI), Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) Educational Technology and Neuroscience
domains will gain a better understanding of the affordances of users’ FDI cognitive
dimensions. The ambition is to exploit the proposed model from a technical
perspective and provide insights that will allow the development of different
algorithm(s) that will better predict and stimulate human performance in assessing
cognitive load and contribute in designing e-leaning and adaptive environments.
6</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Significance of the study and research contribution</title>
      <p>The suggested research will contribute in the theoretical practical levels to the
enhanced understanding of the relations between human brain (EEG) and cognitive
abilities. Since the purpose of this study is to have a glance into individuals’ cognitive
abilities, gaining understanding on how the user sees and thinks we gather unique
insight into HCI with respect to interface design, and e-learning environments design.
Moreover the experiment has been designed to provide help to instructors and
specialists, and to pinpoint the cognitive ability of a student. Eventually, the findings of the
study aim to propose a framework in understanding a person’s preferred way to think
and learn, flattening gaps in the international literature with respect to the nature of a
learner cognitive process, neuroscience field, brain-computer interface (BCI) and
human-computer interaction (HCI) sectors and will enhance the educational
technology domain. The suggested research can bring new contributions to this field and
important educational, theoretical and research significance. It will therefore contribute
methodologically as it utilizes a combination of techniques that are not widely used
together. Finally, an emerging trend within the domain of the examined topic is to
explore the impact of these outcomes on personalized and adaptive learning
understanding how these results can be exploited in the TEL systems. This is a challenge
for other researchers to take into consideration as the implementation and the
outcomes of such studies will contribute to our society’s educational milieu.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sweller</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cognitive Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>12</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>257</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>285</lpage>
          (
          <year>1988</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sweller</surname>
            , J., van Merriënboer,
            <given-names>J. J. G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Cognitive architecture and instructional design</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational Psychology Review</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>251</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>296</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Renkl</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sweller</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational Psychologist</source>
          ,
          <volume>38</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>4</lpage>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dragon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Field dependence and student achievement in technology-based learning: A meta-analysis</article-title>
          .
          <source>Master thesis</source>
          , University of Alberta, Alberta (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Al-Saai</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dwyer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F. M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The effect of visualization on field-dependent and fieldindependent learners</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Instructional Media</source>
          , l.
          <volume>20</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>243</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>249</lpage>
          (
          <year>1993</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kahtz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kling</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Field-dependent and field-independent conceptualisations of various instructional methods with an emphasis on cai: A qualitative analysis</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational Psychology</source>
          ,
          <volume>19</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>413</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>416</lpage>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Luk</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The relationship between cognitive style and academic achievement</article-title>
          .
          <source>British Journal of Educational Technology</source>
          ,
          <volume>29</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>137</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>148</lpage>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Graf</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Liu, T. C.:
          <article-title>Identifying Learning Styles in Learning Management Systems by Using Indications from Students' Behaviour</article-title>
          . In Advanced Learning Technologies, Eighth IEEE International Conference, pp.
          <fpage>482</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>486</lpage>
          . IEEE Press (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Angeli</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Valanides</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>How do Field-Dependent and Field-Independent learners (</article-title>
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stevens</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.H. Galloway T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Berka</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>EEG-Related Changes in Cognitive Workload,Engagement and Distraction as Students Acquire Problem Solving Skills</article-title>
          . In: C.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>McCoy</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and G. Paliouras (Eds.):
          <source>UM</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          , LNAI 4511, pp.
          <fpage>187</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>196</lpage>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Derbali</surname>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Frasson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Physiological evaluation of attention getting strategies during serious game play</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education</source>
          , Springer, Auckland, New Zealand (
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mostow</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nelson</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Toward Exploiting EEG Input in a Reading Tutor</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of AIED</source>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conati</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Merten</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Eye-Tracking for User Modeling in Exploratory Learning Environments: an Empirical Evaluation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Knowledge Based Systems</source>
          ,
          <volume>20</volume>
          (
          <issue>6</issue>
          ), Elsevier Science Publishers (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Toker</surname>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conati</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Steichen</surname>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Carenini</surname>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Individual User Characteristics and Information Visualization: Connecting the Dots through Eye Tracking</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of CHI</source>
          <year>2013</year>
          ,
          <article-title>ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (</article-title>
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15. De Jong, T.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Van Gog</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jenks</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Manlove</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Van Hell</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jolles</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Boschloo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Explorations in learning and the brain: On the potential of cognitive neuroscience for educational science</article-title>
          .
          <source>Report by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research</source>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Witkin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moore</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goodenough</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cox</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P. W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Field-dependent and fieldindependent cognitive styles and their educational implications</article-title>
          .
          <source>Review of educational research</source>
          , 1-
          <fpage>64</fpage>
          (
          <year>1977</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Witkin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moore</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oltman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P. K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goodenough</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Friedman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Owen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.:
          <article-title>Role of the field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles in academic evolution: A longitudinal study</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Educational Psychology</source>
          ,
          <volume>60</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>327</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>332</lpage>
          (
          <year>1977</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rayner</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <source>Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin</source>
          <volume>124</volume>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Granka</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Joachims</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gay</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.:
          <article-title>Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior in www search</article-title>
          .
          <source>In SIGIR '04</source>
          , ACM Press, NY, USA,
          <fpage>478</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>479</lpage>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Boksem</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meijman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lorist</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Effects of mental fatigue on attention: An erp study</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cognitive Brain Research</source>
          <volume>25</volume>
          <fpage>107</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>116</lpage>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21. Van Gog,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Scheiter</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>K.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning</article-title>
          . .
          <source>Learning and Instruction 20</source>
          ,
          <issue>2</issue>
          ,
          <fpage>95</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>99</lpage>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yesilada</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jay</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stevens</surname>
            <given-names>.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Harper</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>S.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Validating the use and role of visual elements of web pages in navigation with an eye-tracking study</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceeding of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web</source>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Germanakos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tsianos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lekkas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mourlas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Samaras</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.:
          <article-title>Eye-tracking users' behavior in relation to cognitive style within an e-learning environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies 329-333</source>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Toker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Steichen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Carenini</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.:
          <article-title>Individual user characteristics and information visualization: connecting the dots through eye tracking</article-title>
          .
          <source>In CHI '13</source>
          , ACM, NY, USA,
          <fpage>295</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>304</lpage>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jozsa</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hamornik</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , P.: Find The Difference!
          <article-title>Eye Tracking Study on Information Seeking Behavior Using an Online Game</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Eye tracking, Visual Cognition and Emotion</source>
          <volume>2</volume>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Macredie</surname>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>D.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Cognitive modeling of student learning in web-based instructional programs</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction</source>
          ,
          <volume>17</volume>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Daniels</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moore</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Interaction of cognitive style and learner control in a hypermedia environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Instructional Media</source>
          ,
          <volume>27</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>369</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>384</lpage>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation>
          28.
          <string-name>
            <surname>French</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ekstrom</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R. B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Price</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Kit of reference tests for cognitive skills</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational Testing Services</source>
          . Princeton: NJ (
          <year>1963</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation>
          29.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nisiforou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Laghos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A Pilot Study using Electroencephalography and Eye-Tracking to Assess and Evaluate Learning Styles</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Conference International Council for Educational Media</source>
          <year>2012</year>
          , Nicosia, Cyprus (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>