User Preferences for Information Feedback Design of a Multi-Person Collaborative System Interface for Emergency Rescue Tasks

Abstract: In recent years, societal factors and technological advancements have significantly accelerated the development of multi-user collaborative applications, reducing geographical constraints and enabling cross-functional cooperation. For instance, large-scale natural disasters often require systematic, multi-party collaborative command systems to support disaster response operations. In the context of earthquake emergency rescue, effective collaboration involves the coordination of various stakeholders, including surveyors, medical personnel, communication staff, rescuers, command officers, and logistics coordinators. These efforts often rely on large-screen interfaces that display vast amounts of data from multiple users. However, the simultaneous presentation of information from diverse sources can impose significant cognitive and response burdens on users. Optimizing the design and presentation of information feedback is therefore critical to ensure that users can efficiently access and accurately perceive collaborative information. Only when feedback effectively captures user attention and facilitates comprehension can it enhance operational efficiency and user experience.Despite its importance, limited research has been conducted on the design of information feedback in multi-user collaborative interfaces, particularly studies focusing on user preferences or the impact of randomness in information appearance. This study aims to address this gap by investigating user preferences for various feedback presentation methods in the context of earthquake emergency command halls, specifically within complex information systems. The research also considers the influence of random information occurrence. Ultimately, the study identifies user preferences for representative feedback methods, collects subjective evaluations from participants, and confirms consistency between subjective assessments and observed preference distributions.Method:The study consisted of two phases involving 16 participants. Tobii eye-tracking technology was employed to collect eye movement data as a measure of user performance and preferences. Following a preliminary investigation, three representative information feedback methods were designed: corner marker, pop-up, and flashing landmark feedback. The corner marker design adopted a commonly used industry-standard notification icon style.In the first phase, user preferences for the three feedback methods were assessed under conditions of single and random multiple presentations. A visual search task was employed to record eye-tracking metrics, such as fixation data, and user responses. The second phase involved a five-point Likert scale questionnaire to gather subjective evaluations of the user experience with each feedback method after completing the tests.Results:The results indicated that, in complex large-screen collaborative interfaces, participants allocated more attention to pop-up and flashing feedback compared to corner marker feedback. However, among the three methods, corner marker feedback elicited quicker and more focused visual attention from users. Subjective user experience ratings collected via the Likert scale were consistent with eye-tracking data, further validating the advantages of corner marker feedback.Conclusion:This study underscores the effectiveness of corner marker feedback in enhancing user efficiency and experience within earthquake emergency command scenarios. By combining objective eye-tracking data with subjective evaluations, the findings provide a comprehensive understanding of user preferences for information feedback methods. These insights offer valuable guidance for optimizing the design of information feedback systems in complex, high-pressure collaborative environments, particularly those used in emergency response operations.

Keywords: Interface Design, User Experience, Multiplayer Collaboration, Feedback

DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1006690

Cite this paper:

​