A comparison of two process tracing methods for choice tasks

Abstract

The proliferation of computerized process tracing tools for monitoring information acquisition behavior demands an inquiry into their validity. This research compares information acquisition behavior for choice tasks using Mouselab, a computerized process tracing tool, and Eyegaze, an eye tracking system. In a paired difference experiment using apartment selection tasks and gambles, we found significant differences in information search patterns and subsequent choice behavior contingent upon the process tracing method. Overall, computerized process tracing tools increase the amount of effort needed to acquire information compared with eye tracking equipment. Our results show that subjects adopt information acquisition strategies to cope with the increased effort. These strategies tend to be more rigorous and systematic than those observed with eye tracking equipment. Thus, computerized process tracing tools fundamentally alter the information processing behavior they are believed to track unobtrusively by limiting the ability of the decision maker to adapt their information processing behavior dynamically to the demands of the data. Additional research is needed to explore the magnitude and consequences of these differences.