IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/lnichp/978-3-030-60073-0_12.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

An Eye-Tracking Study of Differences in Reading Between Automated and Human-Written News

In: Information Systems and Neuroscience

Author

Listed:
  • Chenyan Jia

    (University of Texas at Austin)

  • Jacek Gwizdka

    (University of Texas at Austin)

Abstract

An eye-tracking experiment (N = 24) was conducted to study differences in reading between automated and human-written news. This work adopted expectation-confirmation theory to examine readers’ prior expectations and actual perceptions of both human-written news and automated news. Results revealed that nine eye-tracking variables were significantly different when people read automated news vs. human-written news. Findings also showed promising classification results of 31 eye-tracking-derived features. Self-reported results showed that the readability of human-written news was perceived as significantly higher than that of automated news.

Suggested Citation

  • Chenyan Jia & Jacek Gwizdka, 2020. "An Eye-Tracking Study of Differences in Reading Between Automated and Human-Written News," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization, in: Fred D. Davis & René Riedl & Jan vom Brocke & Pierre-Majorique Léger & Adriane B. Randolph & Thomas (ed.), Information Systems and Neuroscience, pages 100-110, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:lnichp:978-3-030-60073-0_12
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-60073-0_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:lnichp:978-3-030-60073-0_12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.