↓ Skip to main content

Anticipatory eye fixations reveal tool knowledge for tool interaction

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Anticipatory eye fixations reveal tool knowledge for tool interaction
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00221-016-4646-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Belardinelli, Marissa Barabas, Marc Himmelbach, Martin V. Butz

Abstract

Action-oriented eye-tracking studies have shown that eye fixations reveal much about current behavioral intentions. The eyes typically fixate those positions of a tool or an object where the fingers will be placed next, or those positions in a scene, where obstacles need to be avoided to successfully reach or transport a tool or object. Here, we asked to what extent eye fixations can also reveal active cognitive inference processes, which are expected to integrate bottom-up visual information with internal knowledge for planning suitable object interactions task-dependently. In accordance to the available literature, we expected that task-relevant knowledge will include sensorimotor, semantic, and mechanical aspects. To investigate if and in which way this internal knowledge influences eye fixation behavior while planning an object interaction, we presented pictures of familiar and unfamiliar tools and instructed participants to either pantomime 'lifting' or 'using' the respective tool. When confronted with unfamiliar tools, participants fixated the tool's effector part closer and longer in comparison with familiar tools. This difference was particularly prominent during 'using' trials when compared with 'lifting' trials. We suggest that this difference indicates that the brain actively extracts mechanical information about the unknown tool in order to infer its appropriate usage. Moreover, the successive fixations over a trial indicate that a dynamic, task-oriented, active cognitive process unfolds, which integrates available tool knowledge with visually gathered information to plan and determine the currently intended tool interaction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 5%
Indonesia 1 2%
Unknown 40 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Student > Master 7 16%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 44%
Computer Science 4 9%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Design 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,322,106
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,915
of 3,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,053
of 300,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#35
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,232 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 300,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.