## 3 Results
### Eye-Movement Outcomes  
According to the different interactive experience of the navigation interface, the one-way repeated measurement ANOVA was performed on the selected eye movement indicators. The independent variable was the level of interactive experience, and the eye movement indicators in the two modes were respectively taken as the dependent variable according to the mean value. The results of eye movement analysis in the free browsing mode and the task-oriented mode are separately shown in Tables 2 and 3. The heat map of the two models are shown in Figure 4.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Mode**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**High Level**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Low Level**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(F\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\eta^{2}\)} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-6}  & **M (SD)** & & & & \\ \hline Free browse & 82.6250 (7.6389) & 50.6042 (6.2814) & 156.059 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.872 \\ Task-oriented & 85.9792 (8.1019) & 51.3958 (8.0595) & 127.014 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.847 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Repeated measures ANOVA of interactive experience.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Metrics**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Interactive Experience**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**High**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Low**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(F\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\eta^{2}\)} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-6}  & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**M (SD)**} & & & & & \\ \hline Free browse & 82.6250 (7.6389) & 50.6042 (6.2814) & 156.059 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.872 \\ Task-oriented & 85.9792 (8.1019) & 51.3958 (8.0595) & 127.014 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.847 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Repeated measurement ANOVA of eye-movement metrics in free browsing mode.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Metrics**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Interactive Experience**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**High**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Low**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(F\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\eta^{2}\)} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-6}  & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**M (SD)**} & & & & & \\ \hline Free browse & 82.6250 (7.6389) & 50.6042 (6.2814) & 156.059 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.872 \\ Task-oriented & 85.9792 (8.1019) & 51.3958 (8.0595) & 127.014 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.847 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Repeated measures ANOVA of interactive experience.  
It can be seen from Tables 2 and 3. In the free browsing mode, there was a significant difference in the three eye movement indicators, including fixation count, saccade count, and the average saccade amplitude, between the two levels of interactive experience (\(p<0.05\)). While for the first fixation duration and dwell time ratio, no significant effects were obtained. In the task-oriented mode, fixation count, first fixation duration, dwell time ratio, and saccades count all had significant differences between the two levels of the interactive experience (\(p<0.05\)), while the average saccade amplitude did not show a significant effect. The heat map (Figure 4) was helpful to understand and compare the visual information processing between the two experimental modes or different interactive experiences [34]. According to the subjective evaluation, the two games with the biggest difference between the two modes were selected (monster elimination and animal elimination). For the convenience of observation, only one subject was given (subject 1).