journal article·2025-07-28Open access

Exploring the Use of Eye Tracking to Evaluate Usability Affordances: A Case Study on Assistive Device Design

Vicente Bayarri-Porcar, Alba Roda-Sales, Joaquín L. Sancho-Bru, Margarita Vergara

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 15

Abstract

This study explores the application of Eye-Tracking technology for the ergonomic evaluation of assistive device usability. Sixty-four participants evaluated six jar-opening devices in a two-phase study. First, the participants’ gaze was recorded while they viewed six rendered pictures of assistive devices, each shown in two different versions: with and without rubber in the grip area. Second, the participants physically interacted with the devices in a hands-on usability task. In both phases, participants rated the devices according to six usability affordances: robustness, comfort, easiness to grip, lid slippery, effort level, and easiness to use. Eye-Tracking metrics (fixation duration, number of fixations, and visit duration) correlated with the on-screen ratings, which aligned with ratings after using the physical devices. High ratings in comfort and effort level correlated with more visual attention to the grip area, where the rubber acted as key signifier. Heatmaps revealed the grip area as important for comfort and easiness to use and the lid area for robustness and slipperiness. These findings demonstrate the potential of Eye Tracking in usability studies, providing valuable insights for the ergonomic evaluation of assistive devices. Moreover, they highlight the suitability of Eye Tracking for early-stage design evaluation, offering objective metrics to guide design decisions and improve user experience.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology · Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility · Human-Automation Interaction and Safety

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

Affiliations

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Construction, Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castelló, Spain

Funding

Universitat Jaume I

References (40)

Show source-provided references
1. Duruöz, M.T. (2014). Hand Function. A Practical Guide to Assessment, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-9449-2 ↗
2. Effect of Assistive Devices on Hand and Arm Posture during Activities of Daily Living10.1016/j.apergo.2018.12.003 ↗
3. Effect on Hand Kinematics When Using Assistive Devices during Activities of Daily Living10.7717/peerj.7806 ↗
4. A Cross-Sectional Study of the Association between Heberden’s Nodes, Radiographic Osteoarthritis of the Hands, Grip Strength, Disability and Pain10.1053/joca.2001.0460 ↗
5. Activity Limitations and Participation Restrictions in Women with Hand Osteoarthritis: Patients’ Descriptions and Associations between Dimensions of Functioning10.1136/ard.2004.034900 ↗
6. Stamm, T.A., Pieber, K., Crevenna, R., and Dorner, T.E. (2016). Impairment in the Activities of Daily Living in Older Adults with and without Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Chronic Back Pain: A Secondary Analysis of Population-Based Health Survey Data. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 17.10.1186/s12891-016-0994-y ↗
7. Perceptions of Senior Citizens on the Use and Desired Features of a Wristband for Maintaining, Strengthening, and Regaining Hand and Finger Function10.1080/23311916.2020.1719572 ↗
8. Hand Kinematics in Osteoarthritis Patients While Performing Functional Activities
9. Effect of Assistive Technology in Hand Osteoarthritis: A Randomised Controlled Trial10.1136/ard.2010.148668 ↗
10. Assistive Technology Device Use in Patients with Rheumatic Disease: A Literature Review10.5014/ajot.46.2.120 ↗
11. Why Do Older People Love and Hate Assistive Technology? An Emotional Experience Perspective10.1080/00140139.2020.1808714 ↗
12. Assistive Devices: Usage in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis10.1007/s10067-008-0989-7 ↗
13. Evaluation Tools for Assistive Technologies: A Scoping Review10.1016/j.apmr.2020.01.008 ↗
14. Torrens, G., Storer, I., Asghar, S., Welsh, R., and Hurn, K. (May, January 29). Social Camouflage: A Survey of 143 Students of Their Preference for Assistive Technology Cutlery and the Visual Mechanisms Being Influenced. Proceedings of the Ergonomics & Human Factors (EHF), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
15. Older People, Assistive Technologies, and the Barriers to Adoption: A Systematic Review10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004 ↗
16. Mestranda, F.R., Mestrando, G.H.C., Mestrando, J.C.R.P., and Doutoranda, L.F.A. (2012, January 10–13). Intuitividade Em Produto de Uso Doméstico—Um Estudo de Caso Com Ralador de Queijo. Proceedings of the 10o Congresso Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design, São Luís, Brazil.
17. Designing Emotions Pieter Desmet
18. As You like It: Understanding the Relationship between Packing Design and Accessibility10.1002/pts.2466 ↗
19. Vegas López-Manzanares, F., and Romaguera i Ramió, J. (1994). Diseño: Historia, Teoría y Práctica del Diseño Industrial, Gustavo Gili. GG diseño.
20. Norman, D. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition, Basic books.
21. Shaw, R., and Bransford, J. (1977). The Theory of Affordances. Perceiving, Acting and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. What Is an Affordance? 40 Years Later10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.04.014 ↗
23. Radical Embodied Cognitive Science10.1037/a0032923 ↗
24. Affordance Based Design: A Relational Theory for Design10.1007/s00163-008-0060-3 ↗
25. Exploring the Relationships between Product Meanings10.1016/j.ergon.2025.103697 ↗
26. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., and Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning, University of Illinois Press.
27. Duchowski, A.T. (2003). Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4471-3750-4 ↗
28. Applying Eye-Tracking in Kansei Engineering Method for Design Evaluations in Product Development10.5057/ijae.IJAE-D-15-00016 ↗
29. Burlamaqui, L., and Dong, A. (2017, January 6–9). Eye Gaze Experiment into the Recognition of Intended Affordances. Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference; American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, Cleveland, OH, USA.10.1115/DETC2017-67207 ↗
30. Berni, A., MacCioni, L., and Borgianni, Y. (2020, January 26–29). An Eye-Tracking Supported Investigation into the Role of Forms of Representation on Design Evaluations and Affordances of Original Product Features. Proceedings of the Design Society: Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia.10.1017/dsd.2020.296 ↗
31. Tool and Object Affordances: An Ecological Eye-Tracking Study10.1016/j.bandc.2019.103582 ↗
32. Can Eye-Tracking Data Be Measured to Assess Product Design?: Visual Attention Mechanism Should Be Considered10.1016/j.ergon.2015.12.001 ↗
33. An Introductory Study of Common Grasps Used by Adults during Performance of Activities of Daily Living10.1016/j.jht.2014.04.002 ↗
34. SUS-A Quick and Dirty Usability Scale
35. Semantic Differential Applied to the Evaluation of Machine Tool Design10.1016/j.ergon.2005.05.001 ↗
36. Goldberg, J.H., and Helfman, J.I. (2010, January 10–15). Comparing Information Graphics: A Critical Look at Eye Tracking. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—Proceedings, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/2110192.2110203 ↗
37. The Analysis of Ranked Data Derived from Completely Randomized Factorial Designs10.2307/2529511 ↗
38. Sinha, N. (2025, July 27). Non-Parametric Alternative of 2-Way ANOVA (ScheirerRayHare). Available online: https://es.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/96399-non-parametric-alternative-of-2-way-anova-scheirerrayhare.
39. The Visual Environment and Attention in Decision Making10.1037/bul0000328 ↗
40. Fernández-Serrano, P., Tarancón, P., Bonet, L., and Besada, C. (2022). Consumers’ Visual Attention and Choice of ‘Sustainable Irrigation’-Labeled Wine: Logo vs. Text. Agronomy, 12.10.3390/agronomy12030685 ↗