The aim of the thesis was an analysis of the data gained from eye-tracking system within dealing with cartographic tasks, finding the segments showing similar way of dealing with the tasks by respondents, these results compare with the available characteristics of the respondents (male/female, cartographer/non-cartographer) and at the end interpret and visualise them.

At first it was necessary to choose suitable testing, which would be subsequently used. Among these experiments were chosen data, necessary adjustments were made and they were used for following analyses. In this thesis were chosen two main methods of comparing, in which there are firstly compared the trajectory of users’ sights by using the Route algorithm and secondly creating the evaluation using the Levenshtein distance and based on the similarity of the sequence of the letters representing the order of visited AOI. For visualisation and interpretation of the results was chosen the second method. The results of the analyses were clusters, which by the distribution of the elements in branches express their similarity and by its colour they express the membership of the characteristic group.

In the resulting clusters it was looked for parts or branches, where was the majority or homogenous occurrence of some of the researched groups. Such clusters, in which it proved to be at least partial similarities in dealing with the given task by the members of one of the groups, were found and appropriately commented and graphically drawn. From the general view the results could have been divided into three groups — in the first group were the cluster with minimal differences in similarities between the groups, in the second already appeared partial similarities among respondents of the same characteristics and in the last group were already distinguished different methods between the compared groups.

From the general view on the mentioned results it is possible to confirm that users read maps in different ways and some groups are specific for the chosen methods. And it does not matter whether we talk about the differences among those who professionally create maps and those who are only passive receivers of the cartographic products, or the differences given genetically or by raising, which can distinguish the men’s and women’s attitude to maps and generally the issue of spatial sight.

Regarding the fact that by far not at all the clusters were formed the characteristic differences of the distinctive groups during dealing with such cartographic tasks, it would worth to considerate another similar testing which would compare the differences between experts and novices, in this case cartographers and non-cartographers, and to choose more difficult tasks with extra emphasis on the cartographic thinking. Reason for such consideration is fact that in these cases the differences between the people with cartographic education and those without it would be more prominent.

The conclusions of this work can be used as the basis of the fact that there can be distinguished the differences at dealing with cartographic tasks by experts and novices or by men and women and furthermore it is possible to continue in this direction and to extend the compared groups by other respondents with required characteristics.