## 5 Discussion  
The experiment to measure user reactions was carried out as a part of a large psychological study. First-year students from 20 different universities from different cities of the Russian Federation took part in this study, which consisted of surveys and research in the form of cognitive tests. The assessment of reactions to simple questions was built into the survey. The respondents used different devices and types of browsers. A fragment of the \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Triad** & **No. of Occurrences** & **Triad** & **No. of Occurrences** \\ \hline \((1\,1\,1)\) & 2156 & \((2\,3\,3)\) & 1015 \\ \((2\,2\,2)\) & 983 & \((3\,2\,2)\) & 567 \\ \((3\,3\,3)\) & 1313 & \((3\,2\,3)\) & 425 \\ \((4\,4\,4)\) & 2734 & \((3\,3\,2)\) & 410 \\ \((1\,1\,2)\) & 985 & \((3\,3\,4)\) & 383 \\ \((1\,2\,1)\) & 409 & \((3\,4\,3)\) & 335 \\ \((1\,2\,2)\) & 690 & \((3\,4\,4)\) & 774 \\ \((2\,1\,1)\) & 632 & \((4\,3\,3)\) & 538 \\ \((2\,1\,2)\) & 412 & \((4\,3\,4)\) & 232 \\ \((2\,2\,1)\) & 476 & \((4\,4\,3)\) & 501 \\ \((2\,2\,3)\) & 643 & & \\ \((2\,3\,2)\) & 389 & Total & 17,002 out of 22,357 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Frequency of the triads with no or minor qualitative differences between reaction time deviations to questions. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**R (1,2)** & **R (1,3)** & **R (2,3)** \\ \hline
0.9298 & 0.8039 & 0.8376 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: The coefficients of correlation between reaction time deviations of the students for the questions 1–3. Arguments 1–3 stand for the number of the question. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Unrestricted Model** & **Restrictions** & **Wald Statistics** & **Critical Value** \\ \hline \(D_{1}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{1}D_{2}+\beta_{2}D_{3}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{1}=0,\,\,\beta_{2}=0\) & 145,320 & 5.9915 \\ \hline \(D_{1}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{1}D_{2}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{1}=0\) & 142,700 & 3.8415 \\ \hline \(D_{1}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{2}D_{3}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{2}=0\) & 40,854 & 3.8415 \\ \hline \(D_{2}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{1}D_{1}+\beta_{2}D_{3}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{1}=0,\,\,\beta_{2}=0\) & 176,340 & 5.9915 \\ \hline \(D_{2}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{2}D_{3}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{2}=0\) & 52,547 & 3.8415 \\ \hline \(D_{3}=\beta_{0}+\beta_{1}D_{1}+\beta_{2}D_{2}+\varepsilon\) & \(\beta_{1}=0,\,\,\beta_{2}=0\) & 53,735 & 5.9915 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: The Wald test statistics for the deviations \(D_{1}\)-\(D_{3}\) of reaction times for Questions 1–3, respectively, at the significance level of 0.05, \(\beta_{1}\), \(\beta_{3}\) are the constant values, and \(\varepsilon\) is the normally distributed error with a mean of 0 and a variance of 1.  
dataset and the analysis of devices are given in the dataset description in the work [36]. The obtained histograms indicate the reliability of the experiment. Questions 1 and 2 considered in this article were at the beginning of the web survey, and Question 3 was answered after about 1 h, after passing the tasks related to the assessment of spatial abilities; that is, the respondents to the answer to Question 3 were already tried. However, from the obtained histograms and the presented results, it can be seen that despite the change in the reaction time for all data, for all users, the user reactions remained unchanged; that is, both at the beginning of working with the environment and after fatigue, users, on average, demonstrated their characteristic interactions with the interface. This includes the reading speed, the processing time of the data by the nervous system, and corresponding user interface interactions; that is, for those who are slow with information perception and processing, the same degree of inertness remains constant during the study, relative to the average value for all experimental data. Therefore, we built correlations between the values of the deviations of the user's reaction from the average for this issue. The results show that the correlations are high.