# Methodology for Conceptual Navigational 3D Chart Assessment Based on Eye Tracking Measures
## 3 Results
### Map Indicators
\(S_{\text{m}}\)—average number of saccades, \(S_{\text{t}}\)—average saccade duration, \(F_{\text{m}}\)—average number of fixations, \(F_{\text{t}}\)—average fixation duration, \(W_{1}\)—first indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{2}\)—second indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{3}\)—third indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{4}\)—fourth indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{3}\)—third indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{4}\)—fourth indicator based on heatmaps, \(T\)—time for symbol identification, ID—accuracy of symbol identification. Figure 17: Correlation table of indicators developed on the basis of heatmaps for the 2D map (**a**) and 3D map (**b**). Figure 15: Average quantity of correlations for 2D and 3D map for a value greater than or equal to 0.6; \(S_{\text{m}}\)—average number of saccades, \(S_{\text{t}}\)—average saccade duration, \(F_{\text{m}}\)—average number of fixations, \(F_{\text{t}}\)—average fixation duration, \(W_{1}\)—first indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{2}\)—second indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{3}\)—third indicator based on heatmaps, \(W_{4}\)—fourth indicator based on heatmaps, \(T\)—time for symbol identification, ID—accuracy of symbol identification. In the above boxplot, negative values favour the 2D map, while positive values favour the 3D map. Analysing this chart reveals that for the W\({}_{2}\) indicator, the 2D map decisively dominates, indicating that testers found 2D maps to be more readable. For the ID indicator, there is also a preference for the 2D map, though the difference is not as pronounced as for W\({}_{2}\). The results for this indicator suggest that testers interpreted symbols better on 2D maps than on 3D maps. The identification of features was hindered by wreck symbols, whose light colouring reduced their visibility. An additional challenge was the high density of depth contours, which significantly complicated the interpretation of the map. Testers also mentioned that the 3D chart displays, in that case, showed too many symbols at once, which negatively impacted user focus. In contrast, features that were easily identifiable included beacons, marinas, search and rescue stations, reporting points, pilot boarding places, turning areas, submarine cables, and ferry routes. The T indicator was more favourable for the 3D map, which implies that testers identified objects, on average, 3.9 s faster on 3D maps. The ambiguity in interpretation was due to the fact that some of these indicators spoke in favour of the 2D map and some in favour of the 3D map. More problematic interpretation arises when analysing box charts in more detail. In the case of W\({}_{2}\), the mean and median were negative, indicating the advantage of the 2D map. The wide spread of results indicates a high variability between users in the aspect of map readability, and the lower quartile indicates that some participants achieved much better results in 2D. In terms of identification, we have a fairly balanced mix of positive and negative results. The median and mean indicate a small advantage of the 2D map, with many outliers (a significant advantage of object identification) observed in favour of the 3D map. The interquartile interval is small, which supports the consistency of the results. In the case of identification time, positive values prevail, indicating faster identification of objects in the 3D map. One outlier informs about the fast identification of an object with the 3D map. The interquartile range indicates that the results are fairly consistent. What are the final conclusions? Which map is more effective--2D or 3D? There can be only one answer: the final assessment of the maps' effectiveness is troublesome. This stage of the study did not meet our objectives, as we were unable to uniquely assess the effectiveness of the map. Universal indicators were calculated for the 2D and 3D maps, and their values were, respectively, U\({}_{\text{2D}}\) = 26 and U\({}_{\text{3D}}\) = 32. There were no changes in the two cases.