Author:
Hooge Ignace T. C.,Niehorster Diederick C.,Nyström Marcus,Andersson Richard,Hessels Roy S.
Abstract
AbstractEye trackers are applied in many research fields (e.g., cognitive science, medicine, marketing research). To give meaning to the eye-tracking data, researchers have a broad choice of classification methods to extract various behaviors (e.g., saccade, blink, fixation) from the gaze signal. There is extensive literature about the different classification algorithms. Surprisingly, not much is known about the effect of fixation and saccade selection rules that are usually (implicitly) applied. We want to answer the following question: What is the impact of the selection-rule parameters (minimal saccade amplitude and minimal fixation duration) on the distribution of fixation durations? To answer this question, we used eye-tracking data with high and low quality and seven different classification algorithms. We conclude that selection rules play an important role in merging and selecting fixation candidates. For eye-tracking data with good-to-moderate precision (RMSD < 0.5∘), the classification algorithm of choice does not matter too much as long as it is sensitive enough and is followed by a rule that selects saccades with amplitudes larger than 1.0∘ and a rule that selects fixations with duration longer than 60 ms. Because of the importance of selection, researchers should always report whether they performed selection and the values of their parameters.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Psychology,Psychology (miscellaneous),Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference37 articles.
1. Abdulin, E., Friedman, L., & Komogortsev, O. (2017). Method to detect eye position noise from video-oculography when detection of pupil or corneal reflection position fails. arXiv:1709.02700.
2. Andersson, R., Larsson, L., Holmqvist, K., Stridh, M., & Nyström, M. (2017). One algorithm to rule them all? An evaluation and discussion of ten eye movement event-detection algorithms. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 616–637.
3. Collewijn, H., Erkelens, C.J., & Steinman, R.M. (1988). Binocular co-ordination of human horizontal saccadic eye movements. The Journal of Physiology, 404(1), 157–182. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1988.sp017284
4. Cornelissen, T.H.W., & Vo, M.L.H. (2017). Processing of irrelevant object-scene inconsistencies modulates ongoing gaze behavior. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79, 154–168. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1203-7
5. de Barbaro, K., Chiba, A., & Deak, G.O. (2011). Micro-analysis of infant looking in a naturalistic social setting: Insights from biologically based models of attention . Developmental Science, 14(5), 1150–1160.
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献