Search

Gaze behaviour is an important component of successful social interactions. Existing research on social gaze and attention has largely focused on gaze detection and following, rather than the two-way communicative component of gaze that operates between individuals. The present study sought to address this in two experiments. First, "hiders" were eye-tracked while they selected hiding places among a grid of boxes on a computer screen; these boxes were either homogeneous or contained a visually unique pop-out item. Importantly, sometimes hiders believed that their gaze would be seen by hypothetical "seekers" who they might wish to deceive or communicate truthful information to; and sometime hiders believed that their gaze would be concealed. In a second experiment, seekers were asked to select the hiders' locations after viewing the hiders' gaze behaviour, including the eye movements that hiders had been (falsely) told would be concealed. Results indicate that seekers are most accurate when hiders use their gaze to truthfully communicate their selected locations and least accurate when hiders aim to deceive. Notably, both communication and interpretation strategies were affected by the visual display type (e.g., hiders looked to and preferentially selected pop-out items when communicating truthfully while seekers interpreted gaze differently when allocated to these pop-out items), indicating that the visual context can be integrated with gaze to facilitate mis/communication. Our study illuminates how the gaze of an individual acquires and signals information, and that individuals will spontaneously adjust the balance between these two functions based on their current goal and visual environment.

During scene viewing, semantic information in the scene has been shown to play a dominant role in guiding fixations compared to visual salience (e.g., HendersonHayes, 2017). However, scene viewing is sometimes disrupted by cognitive processes unrelated to the scene. For example, viewers sometimes engage in mind-wandering, or having thoughts unrelated to the current task. How do meaning and visual salience account for fixation allocation when the viewer is mind-wandering, and does it differ from when the viewer is on-task? We asked participants to study a series of real-world scenes in preparation for a later memory test. Thought probes occasionally occurred after a subset of scenes to assess whether participants were on-task or mind-wandering. We used salience maps (Graph-Based Visual Saliency; Harel, Koch,Perona, 2007) and meaning maps (HendersonHayes, 2017) to represent the distribution of visual salience and semantic richness in the scene, respectively. Because visual salience and meaning were represented similarly, we could directly compare how well they predicted fixation allocation. Our results indicate that fixations prioritized meaningful over visually salient regions in the scene during mind-wandering just as during attentive viewing. These results held across the entire viewing time. A re-analysis of an independent study (Krasich, Huffman, Faber,Brockmole Journal of Vision, 20(9), 10, 2020) showed similar results. Therefore, viewers appear to prioritize meaningful regions over visually salient regions in real-world scenes even during mind-wandering.

While passive social information (e.g. pictures of people) routinely draws one's eyes, our willingness to look at live others is more nuanced. People tend not to stare at strangers and will modify their gaze behaviour to avoid sending undesirable social signals; yet they often continue to monitor others covertly “out of the corner of their eyes.” What this means for looks that are being made near to live others is unknown. Will the eyes be drawn towards the other person, or pushed away? We evaluate changes in two elements of gaze control: image-independent principles guiding how people look (e.g. biases to make eye movements along the cardinal directions) and image-dependent principles guiding what people look at (e.g. a preference for meaningful content within a scene). Participants were asked to freely view semantically unstructured (fractals) and semantically structured (rotated landscape) images, half of which were located in the space near to a live other. We found that eye movements were horizontally displaced away from a visible other starting at 1032 ms after stimulus onset when fractals but not landscapes were viewed. We suggest that the avoidance of looking towards live others extends to the near space around them, at least in the absence of semantically meaningful gaze targets.

How do we explore the visual environment around us, and how are head and eye movements coordinated during our exploration? To investigate this question, we had observers look at omnidirectional panoramic scenes, composed of both landscape and fractal images, using a virtual reality viewer while their eye and head movements were tracked. We analyzed the spatial distribution of eye fixations and the distribution of saccade directions and the spatial distribution of head positions and the distribution of head shifts, as well as the relation between eye and head movements. The results show that, for landscape scenes, eye and head behavior best fit the allocentric frame defined by the scene horizon, especially when head tilt (i.e., head rotation around the view axis) is considered. For fractal scenes, which have an isotropic texture, eye and head movements were executed primarily along the cardinal directions in world coordinates. The results also show that eye and head movements are closely linked in space and time in a complementary way, with stimulus-driven eye movements predominantly leading the head movements. Our study is the first to systematically examine eye and head movements in a panoramic virtual reality environment, and the results demonstrate that a virtual reality environment constitutes a powerful and informative research alternative to traditional methods for investigating looking behavior.

In two experiments, we investigated the role of apparent motion in discriminating left/right gaze deviation judgments. We demonstrated that discrimination accuracy and response confidence was significantly higher when the eyes were moved to the left or right, compared to when the eyes were presented in their final shifted position (static images). To dissociate the role of motion signals from luminance signals, gaze stimuli were also presented in reverse contrast. Replicating past studies polarity reversal had a profound and detrimental effect on gaze discrimination in static images, although, intriguingly, while response confidence remained low, participant performance improved as gaze angle increased. In striking contrast to these data, polarity reversal had no negative effect on performance when the eyes were moved. We discuss these findings in the context of a multiple-cue account of gaze perception.

In the present study, we examined the eye movement behaviour of children and adults looking at five Van Gogh paintings in the Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam. The goal of the study was to determine the role of top-down and bottom-up attentional processes in the first stages of participants’ aesthetic experience. Bottom-up processes were quantified by determining a salience map for each painting. Top-down processing was manipulated by first allowing participants to view the paintings freely, then providing background information about each painting, and then allowing them to view the paintings a second time. The salience analysis showed differences between the eye movement behaviour of children and adults, and differences between the two phases. In the children, the first five fixations during the free viewing phase were strongly related to visually salient features of the paintings—indicating a strong role for bottom-up factors. In the second phase, after children had received background information, top-down factors played a more prominent role. By contrast, adults’ observed patterns were similar in both phases, indicating that bottom-up processes did not play a major role when they viewed the paintings. In the second phase, children and adults both spent more time looking at regions that were mentioned in the background information. This effect was greater for adults than for children, confirming the notion that adults, when viewing paintings, rely much more on top-down processing than children.

A change to an object in natural scenes attracts attention when it occurs during a fixation. However, when a change occurs during a saccade, and is masked by saccadic suppression, it typically does not capture the gaze in a bottom-up manner. In the present work, we investigated how the type and direction of salient changes to objects affect the prioritization and targeting of objects in natural scenes. We asked observers to look around a scene in preparation for a later memory test. After a period of time, an object in the scene was increased or decreased in salience either during a fixation (with a transient signal) or during a saccade (without transient signal), or it was not changed at all. Changes that were made during a fixation attracted the eyes both when the change involved an increase and a decrease in salience. However, changes that were made during a saccade only captured the eyes when the change was an increase in salience, relative to the baseline no-change condition. These results suggest that the prioritization of object changes can be influenced by the underlying salience of the changed object. In addition, object changes that occurred with a transient signal (which is itself a salient signal) resulted in more central object targeting. Taken together, our results suggest that salient signals in a natural scene are an important component in both object prioritization and targeting in natural scene viewing, insofar as they align with object locations.

Recurrence quantification analysis (RQA) has been successfully used for describing dynamic systems that are too complex to be characterized adequately by standard methods in time series analysis. More recently, RQA has been used for analyzing the coordination of gaze patterns between cooperating individuals. Here, we extend RQA to the characterization of fixation sequences, and we show that the global and local temporal characteristics of fixation sequences can be captured by a small number of RQA measures that have a clear interpretation in this context. We applied RQA to the analysis of a study in which observers looked at different scenes under natural or gaze-contingent viewing conditions, and we found large differences in the RQA measures between the viewing conditions, indicating that RQA is a powerful new tool for the analysis of the temporal patterns of eye movement behavior.

Interest has flourished in studying both the spatial and temporal aspects of eye movement behavior. This has sparked the development of a large number of new methods to compare scanpaths. In the present work, we present a detailed overview of common scanpath comparison measures. Each of these measures was developed to solve a specific problem, but quantifies different aspects of scanpath behavior and requires different data-processing techniques. To understand these differences, we applied each scanpath comparison method to data from an encoding and recognition experiment and compared their ability to reveal scanpath similarities within and between individuals looking at natural scenes. Results are discussed in terms of the unique aspects of scanpath behavior that the different methods quantify. We conclude by making recommendations for choosing an appropriate scanpath comparison measure.

Recent research has begun to explore not just the spatial distribution of eye fixations but also the temporal dynamics of how we look at the world. In this investigation, we assess how scene characteristics contribute to these fixation dynamics. In a free-viewing task, participants viewed three scene types: fractal, landscape, and social scenes. We used a relatively new method, recurrence quantification analysis (RQA), to quantify eye movement dynamics. RQA revealed that eye movement dynamics were dependent on the scene type viewed. To understand the underlying cause for these differences we applied a technique known as fractal analysis and discovered that complexity and clutter are two scene characteristics that affect fixation dynamics, but only in scenes with meaningful content. Critically, scene primitives-revealed by saliency analysis-had no impact on performance. In addition, we explored how RQA differs from the first half of the trial to the second half, as well as the potential to investigate the precision of fixation targeting by changing RQA radius values. Collectively, our results suggest that eye movement dynamics result from topdown viewing strategies that vary according to the meaning of a scene and its associated visual complexity and clutter. © 2014 ARVO.