Cargando…

Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation

Eye tracking is a useful tool for studying human cognition, both in the laboratory and in real-world applications. However, there are cases in which eye tracking is not possible, such as in high-security environments where recording devices cannot be introduced. After facing this challenge in our ow...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Matzen, Laura E., Stites, Mallory C., Gastelum, Zoe. N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8226349/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34170426
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00304-2
_version_ 1783712269653245952
author Matzen, Laura E.
Stites, Mallory C.
Gastelum, Zoe. N.
author_facet Matzen, Laura E.
Stites, Mallory C.
Gastelum, Zoe. N.
author_sort Matzen, Laura E.
collection PubMed
description Eye tracking is a useful tool for studying human cognition, both in the laboratory and in real-world applications. However, there are cases in which eye tracking is not possible, such as in high-security environments where recording devices cannot be introduced. After facing this challenge in our own work, we sought to test the effectiveness of using artificial foveation as an alternative to eye tracking for studying visual search performance. Two groups of participants completed the same list comparison task, which was a computer-based task designed to mimic an inventory verification process that is commonly performed by international nuclear safeguards inspectors. We manipulated the way in which the items on the inventory list were ordered and color coded. For the eye tracking group, an eye tracker was used to assess the order in which participants viewed the items and the number of fixations per trial in each list condition. For the artificial foveation group, the items were covered with a blurry mask except when participants moused over them. We tracked the order in which participants viewed the items by moving their mouse and the number of items viewed per trial in each list condition. We observed the same overall pattern of performance for the various list display conditions, regardless of the method. However, participants were much slower to complete the task when using artificial foveation and had more variability in their accuracy. Our results indicate that the artificial foveation method can reveal the same pattern of differences across conditions as eye tracking, but it can also impact participants’ task performance. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41235-021-00304-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8226349
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82263492021-06-25 Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation Matzen, Laura E. Stites, Mallory C. Gastelum, Zoe. N. Cogn Res Princ Implic Original Article Eye tracking is a useful tool for studying human cognition, both in the laboratory and in real-world applications. However, there are cases in which eye tracking is not possible, such as in high-security environments where recording devices cannot be introduced. After facing this challenge in our own work, we sought to test the effectiveness of using artificial foveation as an alternative to eye tracking for studying visual search performance. Two groups of participants completed the same list comparison task, which was a computer-based task designed to mimic an inventory verification process that is commonly performed by international nuclear safeguards inspectors. We manipulated the way in which the items on the inventory list were ordered and color coded. For the eye tracking group, an eye tracker was used to assess the order in which participants viewed the items and the number of fixations per trial in each list condition. For the artificial foveation group, the items were covered with a blurry mask except when participants moused over them. We tracked the order in which participants viewed the items by moving their mouse and the number of items viewed per trial in each list condition. We observed the same overall pattern of performance for the various list display conditions, regardless of the method. However, participants were much slower to complete the task when using artificial foveation and had more variability in their accuracy. Our results indicate that the artificial foveation method can reveal the same pattern of differences across conditions as eye tracking, but it can also impact participants’ task performance. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41235-021-00304-2. Springer International Publishing 2021-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8226349/ /pubmed/34170426 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00304-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Matzen, Laura E.
Stites, Mallory C.
Gastelum, Zoe. N.
Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title_full Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title_fullStr Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title_full_unstemmed Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title_short Studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
title_sort studying visual search without an eye tracker: an assessment of artificial foveation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8226349/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34170426
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00304-2
work_keys_str_mv AT matzenlaurae studyingvisualsearchwithoutaneyetrackeranassessmentofartificialfoveation
AT stitesmalloryc studyingvisualsearchwithoutaneyetrackeranassessmentofartificialfoveation
AT gastelumzoen studyingvisualsearchwithoutaneyetrackeranassessmentofartificialfoveation