journal article·2025-01-24Open access

Using Eye-Tracking Data to Examine Response Processes in Digital Competence Assessment for Validation Purposes

Juan Bartolomé, Pablo Garaizar, Erlantz Loizaga, Leire Bastida

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 3

Abstract

Background: When measuring complex cognitive constructs, it is crucial to correctly design the evaluation items in order to trigger the intended knowledge and skills. Furthermore, assessing the validity of an assessment requires considering not only the content of the evaluation tasks, but also how examinees perform by engaging construct-relevant response processes. Objectives: We used eye-tracking techniques to examine item response processes in the assessment of digital competence. The eye-tracking observations helped to fill an ‘explanatory gap’ by providing data on the variation in response processes that cannot be captured by other common sources. Method: Specifically, we used eye movement data to validate the inferences made between claimed and observed behavior. This allowed us to interpret how participants processed the information in the items in terms of Area Of Interest (their size, placement, and order). Results and Conclusions: The gaze data provide detailed information about response strategies at the item level, profiling the examinees according to their engagement, response processes and performance/success rate. The presented evidence confirms that the response patterns of the participants who responded well do not represent an alternative to the interpretation of the results that would undermine the assessment criteria. Takeaways: Gaze-based evidence has great potential to provide complementary data about the response processes performed by examinees, thereby contributing to the validity argument.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Digital literacy in education · Online and Blended Learning · Online Learning and Analytics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

TECNALIA, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), 48160 Derio, Bizkaia, Spain

Faculty of Engineering, University of Deusto, 48007 Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. Twenty-first century skills for all: Adults and problem solving in technology rich environments10.1007/s10758-019-09403-y ↗
2. Kluzer, S., and Priego, L.P. (2018). Digcomp Into Action: Get Inspired, Make it Happen. A User Guide to the European Digital Competence Framework (No. JRC110624), Joint Research Centre.
3. Law, N., Woo, D., and Wong, G. (2018). A Global Framework of Reference on Digital Literacy Skills for Indicator 4.4.2, UNESCO.
4. Taking a future perspective by learning from the past–A systematic review of assessment instruments that aim to measure primary and secondary school students’ ICT literacy10.1016/j.edurev.2016.05.002 ↗
5. Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping Digital Competence: Towards a Conceptual Understanding, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
6. Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143 ↗
7. Ferrari, A., and Punie, Y. (2013). DIGCOMP: A Framework for Developing and Understanding Digital Competence in Europe, Publications Office of the European Union.
8. A research review of e-assessment10.1080/02602938.2011.557496 ↗
9. A Pragmatic Approach for Evaluating and Accrediting Digital Competence of Digital Profiles: A Case Study of Entrepreneurs and Remote Workers10.1007/s10758-021-09516-3 ↗
10. Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121 ↗
11. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., and Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills, Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2 ↗
12. Developing a computer-based assessment of complex problem solving in Chemistry10.1186/2196-7822-1-2 ↗
13. Changing assessment—Towards a new assessment paradigm using ICT10.1111/ejed.12018 ↗
14. Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.028 ↗
15. The impact of learning design on student behaviour, satisfaction and performance: A cross-institutional comparison across 151 modules10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.074 ↗
16. What makes the difference–PIAAC as a resource for understanding the problem-solving skills of Europe’s higher-education adults10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.013 ↗
17. Von Davier, A.A., Zhu, M., and Kyllonen, P.C. (2017). Innovative Assessment of Collaboration, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-33261-1 ↗
18. Formative assessment: A critical review
19. Computer-generated log-file analyses as a window into students’ minds? A showcase study based on the PISA 2012 assessment of problem solving10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.018 ↗
20. Rethinking assessment in a digital age: Opportunities, challenges and risks10.1002/berj.3215 ↗
21. Oranje, A., Gorin, J., Jia, Y., and Kerr, D. (2017). Collecting, Analyzing, and Interpreting Response Time, Eye-Tracking, and Log Data. Validation of Score Meaning for the Next Generation of Assessments, Routledge. [1st ed.].10.4324/9781315708591-5 ↗
22. Saltos-Rivas, R., Novoa-Hernández, P., and Serrano Rodríguez, R. (2021). On the quality of quantitative instruments to measure digital competence in higher education: A systematic mapping study. PLoS ONE, 16.10.1371/journal.pone.0257344 ↗
23. Gegenfurtner, A., Lehtinen, E., and Säljö, R. (2020). Expertise and the Sequential Organization of Video Game Play: Insights from Eye-Tracking. Front. Psychol., 11.
24. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329 ↗
25. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 ↗
26. Domaingeneral problem solving skills and education in the 21st century10.1016/j.edurev.2014.10.002 ↗
27. Bartolomé, J., Garaizar, P., and Bastida, L. (2020, January 21–23). Validating item response processes in digital competence assessment through eye-tracking techniques. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain.10.1145/3434780.3436641 ↗
28. Bashir, S., and Miyamoto, K. (2020). Digital Skills: Frameworks and Programs, World Bank. Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35080.10.1596/35080 ↗
29. Duchowski, A.T. (2017). Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice, Springer. [3rd ed.].10.1007/978-3-319-57883-5 ↗
30. Validity on parole: How can we go straight
31. Kane, M., and Mislevy, R. (2017). Validating score interpretations based on response processes. Validation of Score Meaning for the Next Generation of Assessments, Routledge.10.4324/9781315708591-2 ↗
32. Eye movements of aircraft pilots during instrument-landing approaches
33. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, American Educational Research Association.
34. Ercikan, K., and Pellegrino, J.W. (2017). Validation of Score Meaning for The Next Generation of Assessments: The Use of Response Processes, Taylor & Francis.10.4324/9781315708591 ↗
35. Hubley, A.M., and Zumbo, B.D. (2017). Response processes in the context of validity: Setting the stage. Understanding and Investigating Response Processes in Validation Research, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-56129-5_1 ↗
36. Cronbach, L.J. (1949). Essentials of Psychological Testing, Harper & Brothers. [2nd ed.].
37. Zumbo, B.D., and Hubley, A.M. (2017). Understanding and Investigating Response Processes in Validation Research, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-56129-5 ↗
38. Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues10.1080/00461520.2015.1004069 ↗
39. Using Eye-Tracking Data as Part of the Validity Argument for Multiple-Choice Questions: A Demonstration10.1111/jedm.12304 ↗
40. Identifying the response process validity of clinical vignette-type multiple choice questions: An eye-tracking study10.1080/0142159X.2023.2182662 ↗
41. Kraitzek, A., and Förster, M. (2023). Measurement of Financial Competence—Designing a Complex Framework Model for a Complex Assessment Instrument. J. Risk Financ. Manag., 16.10.3390/jrfm16040223 ↗
42. Investigating the cognitive complexity of science assessments10.1111/j.1745-3992.1998.tb00627.x ↗
43. De Boeck, P., and Jeon, M. (2019). An overview of models for response times and processes in cognitive tests. Front. Psychol., 10.10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00102 ↗
44. Lee, Y.H., Hao, J., Man, K., and Ou, L. (2019). How do test takers interact with simulation-based tasks? A response-time perspective. Front. Psychol., 10.10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00906 ↗
45. Messick, S. (1987). Validity. ETS Research Report Series, Wiley.10.1002/j.2330-8516.1987.tb00244.x ↗
46. Use of response process data to inform group comparisons and fairness research10.1080/10627197.2020.1804353 ↗
47. Understanding students’ performance in a computer-based assessment of complex problem solving: An analysis of behavioral data from computer-generated log files10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.095 ↗
48. How to conceptualize, represent, and analyze log data from technology-based assessments? A generic framework and an application to questionnaire items10.1007/s41237-018-0063-y ↗
49. Conceptual issues in response—Time modeling10.1111/j.1745-3984.2009.00080.x ↗
50. Li, Z., Banerjee, J., and Zumbo, B.D. (2017). Response time data as validity evidence: Has it lived up to its promise and, if not, what would it take to do so. Understanding and Investigating Response Processes in Validation Research, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-56129-5_9 ↗
51. Araneda, S., Lee, D., Lewis, J., Sireci, S.G., Moon, J.A., Lehman, B., and Keehner, M. (2022). Exploring Relationships among Test Takers’ Behaviors and Performance Using Response Process Data. Educ. Sci., 12.10.3390/educsci12020104 ↗
52. What is response process validation evidence and how important is it? An essay reviewing Ercikan and Pellegrino (2017) and Zumbo and Hubley (2017)
53. Assessing the validity of test scores using response process data from an eye-tracking study: A new approach10.1007/s10459-022-10107-9 ↗
54. Zumbo, B.D., and Chan, E.K. (2014). Validity and Validation in Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-07794-9 ↗
55. Eye fixations and cognitive processes10.1016/0010-0285(76)90015-3 ↗
56. Visualization of eye tracking data: A taxonomy and survey10.1111/cgf.13079 ↗
57. A systematic review of eye tracking research on multimedia learning10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.023 ↗
58. Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618 ↗
59. A systematic review of eye-tracking-based research on animated multimedia learning10.1111/jcal.12629 ↗
60. The use of eye tracking technology to explore learning and performance within virtual reality and mixed reality settings: A scoping review10.1080/10494820.2019.1702560 ↗
61. Just, M.A., and Carpenter, P.A. (2018). Using eye fixations to study reading comprehension. New Methods in Reading Comprehension Research, Routledge.10.4324/9780429505379-8 ↗
62. Eye tracking in Educational Science: Theoretical frameworks and research agendas
63. Do the eyes have it? Using eye tracking to assess students cognitive dimensions10.1080/09523987.2013.862363 ↗
64. Eye-tracking technology in medical education: A systematic review10.1080/0142159X.2017.1391373 ↗
65. An eye tracking study of high-and low-performing students in solving interactive and analytical problems
66. Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.012 ↗
67. A review of eye tracking for understanding and improving diagnostic interpretation10.1186/s41235-019-0159-2 ↗
68. Factors influencing viewing behaviour on search engine results pages: A review of eye-tracking research10.1080/0144929X.2020.1761450 ↗
69. Eye tracking scanpath analysis techniques on web pages: A survey, evaluation and comparison
70. Eye tracking for skills assessment and training: A systematic review10.1016/j.jss.2014.04.032 ↗
71. Viewing another person’s eye movements improves identification of pulmonary nodules in chest x-ray inspection10.1037/a0020082 ↗
72. Seeing through a teacher’s eyes improves students’ imaging interpretation10.1111/medu.12041 ↗
73. Conveying clinical reasoning based on visual observation via eye-movement modelling examples10.1007/s11251-012-9218-5 ↗
74. Re-viewing performance: Showing eye-tracking data as feedback to improve performance monitoring in a complex visual task10.1111/jcal.12666 ↗
75. Using eye movements to model the sequence of text–picture processing for multimedia comprehension10.1111/jcal.12191 ↗
76. I see something you do not: Eye movement modelling examples do not improve anomaly detection in interpreting medical images10.1111/jcal.12619 ↗
77. How visual search relates to visual diagnostic performance: A narrative systematic review of eye-tracking research in radiology10.1007/s10459-016-9698-1 ↗
78. Improving visual behavior research in communication science: An overview, review, and reporting recommendations for using eye-tracking methods10.1080/19312458.2018.1558194 ↗
79. Algorithms for defining visual regions-of-interest: Comparison with eye fixations10.1109/34.877520 ↗
80. Goldberg, J.H., Stimson, M.J., Lewenstein, M., Scott, N., and Wichansky, A.M. (2002, January 25–27). Eye tracking in web search tasks: Design im-plications. Proceedings of the 2002 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1145/507079.507082 ↗
81. SubsMatch 2.0: Scanpath comparison and classification based on subsequence frequencies10.3758/s13428-016-0765-6 ↗
82. An exploration of the use of eye-gaze tracking to study problem-solving on standardized science assessments10.1080/17437270600891614 ↗
83. Scanpath modeling and classification with hidden Markov models10.3758/s13428-017-0876-8 ↗
84. Looking at faces: Local and global aspects of scanpaths10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61874-9 ↗
85. Predicting task from eye movements: On the importance of spatial distribution, dynamics, and image features10.1016/j.neucom.2016.05.047 ↗
86. Kanan, C., Ray, N.A., Bseiso, D.N., Hsiao, J.H., and Cottrell, G.W. (2014, January 26–28). Predicting an observer’s task using multi-fixation pattern analysis. Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications, Safety Harbor, FL, USA.10.1145/2578153.2578208 ↗
87. 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 University Press.
88. Eivazi, S., and Bednarik, R. (2011, January 13). Predicting problem-solving behavior and performance levels from visual attention data. Proceedings of the Workshop on Eye Gaze in Intelligent Human Machine Interaction at IUI, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
89. Expertise differences in the comprehension of visualizations: A meta-analysis of eye-tracking research in professional domains10.1007/s10648-011-9174-7 ↗
90. Learning in digital networks—ICT literacy: A novel assessment of students’ 21st century skills10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.014 ↗
91. Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., and Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens, Publications Office of the European Union.
92. Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741 ↗
93. Bartolomé, J., and Garaizar, P. (2022). Design and Validation of a Novel Tool to Assess Citizens’ Netiquette and Information and Data Literacy Using Interactive Simulations. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su14063392 ↗
94. OPTICS: Ordering points to identify the clustering structure10.1145/304181.304187 ↗
95. Dolezalova, J., and Popelka, S. (2016). Scangraph: A novel scanpath comparison method using visualisation of graph cliques. J. Eye Mov. Res., 9.10.16910/jemr.9.4.5 ↗
96. Entry points and reading paths on newspaper spreads: Comparing a semiotic analysis with eye-tracking measurements10.1177/1470357206061005 ↗
97. Web users with autism: Eye tracking evidence for differences10.1080/0144929X.2018.1551933 ↗
98. Inal, Y. (2016). User-friendly locations of error messages in web forms: An eye tracking study. J. Eye Mov. Res., 9.10.16910/jemr.9.5.1 ↗
99. Selective attention to question-relevant text information precedes high-quality summaries: Evidence from eye movements
100. Advanced, analytic, automated (AAA) measurement of engagement during learning10.1080/00461520.2017.1281747 ↗