## 3 Results
### Data from and Results of Experiment 2  
The three scenes in Experiment 2 were all from the Taizichen railway station: Scene 1 (S1), the transfer lane inside; Scene 2 (S2), the waiting hall inside; and Scene 3 (S3), the landscape pavilion outside. The visualization results for the subjects in terms of scene memory are shown in Table 7. The visual range of S1 was more concentrated. The fixation points were mainly distributed in a \"+\" shape, with the center of the picture serving as the midpoint. The visual range of S2 was more dispersed than that of S1. The distribution of viewpoints in the horizontal direction was greater than in the vertical direction. The visual range of S3 was more dispersed. The fixation points were mainly distributed horizontally in a \"\(-\)\" shape. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Average Value**} \\ \cline{2-6}
**Eye-Tracking Dependent Variable** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Line and Surface**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Surface**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Outline**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Line**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Error**} \\ \cline{2-6}
**(within 15 s)** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**N = 92**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**N = 92**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**N = 92**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**N = 92**} \\ \hline G1 & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.192 & 0.215 & 0.224 & 0.180 & 0.221 \\ AOI MED (s) & 0.213 & 0.191 & 0.203 & 0.213 & 0.198 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 20.415 & 10.042 & 18.644 & 28.882 & 10.171 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 21.634 & 9.732 & 18.825 & 30.416 & 9.854 \\ \hline G2 & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.235 & 0.221 & 0.241 & 0.217 & 0.198 \\ AOI MED (s) & 0.204 & 0.215 & 0.239 & 0.209 & 0.210 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 13.839 & 14.837 & 27.869 & 9.943 & 12.972 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 13.993 & 14.787 & 30.345 & 10.220 & 13.002 \\ \hline G3 & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.196 & 0.181 & 0.163 & 0.229 & 0.218 \\ AOI MFD (s) & 0.207 & 0.212 & 0.152 & 0.224 & 0.199 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 18.670 & 23.146 & 10.277 & 15.672 & 11.958 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 19.217 & 24.686 & 9.121 & 17.488 & 12.786 \\ \hline G4 & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.227 & 0.197 & 0.196 & 0.220 & 0.211 \\ AOI MFD (s) & 0.227 & 0.198 & 0.199 & 0.193 & 0.197 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 29.778 & 15.687 & 15.582 & 11.137 & 11.440 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 32.306 & 15.513 & 15.207 & 11.331 & 11.173 \\ \hline G5 & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.201 & 0.198 & 0.230 & 0.197 & 0.232 \\ AOI MFD (s) & 0.240 & 0.204 & 0.201 & 0.224 & 0.197 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 29.620 & 11.952 & 10.176 & 21.960 & 6.954 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 32.554 & 11.815 & 9.749 & 22.718 & 6.275 \\ \hline All Group & & & & & \\ AOI FF (s) & 0.210 & 0.203 & 0.211 & 0.209 & 0.216 \\ AOI MFD (s) & 0.218 & 0.204 & 0.199 & 0.213 & 0.200 \\ AOI FC (\%) & 22.465 & 15.133 & 16.510 & 17.519 & 10.699 \\ AOI TFD (\%) & 23.941 & 15.306 & 16.650 & 18.435 & 10.618 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Comparison of Eye-Tracking Index Data for the Five Types of Symbols. Combined with human visual characteristics, the horizontal field of view tends to be much greater than the vertical, and the eyes move faster and grow less fatigued in the horizontal rather than the vertical direction [52]. Thus, given the limited time, subjects in the present research tended to prioritize their information search efforts in the horizontal direction, followed by the vertical direction. Further viewed in conjunction with the FC and SC indicators (see Table 8), the FCs in S1 were approximately twice that of S2 and S3, and the SCs were approximately 88% that of S2 and S3. This indicated that the subjects had more difficulty with searching for target information in S2 and S3, due to challenges with finding the target and the need to scan the scenes extensively; this was likely attributable to the complexity of the spatial structure.