↓ Skip to main content

The area-of-interest problem in eyetracking research: A noise-robust solution for face and sparse stimuli

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 Mendeley
Title
The area-of-interest problem in eyetracking research: A noise-robust solution for face and sparse stimuli
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, November 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13428-015-0676-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roy S. Hessels, Chantal Kemner, Carlijn van den Boomen, Ignace T. C. Hooge

Abstract

A problem in eyetracking research is choosing areas of interest (AOIs): Researchers in the same field often use widely varying AOIs for similar stimuli, making cross-study comparisons difficult or even impossible. Subjective choices while choosing AOIs cause differences in AOI shape, size, and location. On the other hand, not many guidelines for constructing AOIs, or comparisons between AOI-production methods, are available. In the present study, we addressed this gap by comparing AOI-production methods in face stimuli, using data collected with infants and adults (with autism spectrum disorder [ASD] and matched controls). Specifically, we report that the attention-attracting and attention-maintaining capacities of AOIs differ between AOI-production methods, and that this matters for statistical comparisons in one of three groups investigated (the ASD group). In addition, we investigated the relation between AOI size and an AOI's attention-attracting and attention-maintaining capacities, as well as the consequences for statistical analyses, and report that adopting large AOIs solves the problem of statistical differences between the AOI methods. Finally, we tested AOI-production methods for their robustness to noise, and report that large AOIs-using the Voronoi tessellation method or the limited-radius Voronoi tessellation method with large radii-are most robust to noise. We conclude that large AOIs are a noise-robust solution in face stimuli and, when implemented using the Voronoi method, are the most objective of the researcher-defined AOIs. Adopting Voronoi AOIs in face-scanning research should allow better between-group and cross-study comparisons.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 240 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 23%
Student > Master 31 13%
Researcher 23 9%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 8%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 56 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 69 28%
Computer Science 18 7%
Neuroscience 18 7%
Engineering 12 5%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Other 41 17%
Unknown 76 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#7,029,691
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#867
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,828
of 293,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#11
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 293,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.