Dataset Information

A toolkit for wide-screen dynamic area of interest measurements using the Pupil Labs Core Eye Tracker.

ABSTRACT: Eye tracking measurements taken while watching a wide field screen are challenging to perform. Commercially available remote eye trackers typically do not measure more than 35 degrees in eccentricity. Analysis software was developed using the Pupil Core Eye Tracking data to analyze viewing behavior under circumstances as natural as possible, on a 1.55-m-wide screen allowing free head movements. Additionally, dynamic area of interest (AOI) analyses were performed on data of participants viewing traffic scenes. A toolkit was created including software for simple allocation of dynamic AOIs (semi-automatically and manually), measurement of parameters such as dwell times and time to first entry, and overlaying gaze and AOIs on video. Participants (n =11) were asked to look at 13 dynamic AOIs in traffic scenes from appearance to disappearance in order to validate the setup and software. Different AOI margins were explored for the included objects. The median ratio between total appearance time and dwell time was about 90% for most objects when appropriate margins were chosen. This validated open-source toolkit is readily available for researchers who want to perform dynamic AOI analyses with the Pupil Core eye tracker, especially when measurements are desired on a wide screen, in various fields such as psychology, transportation, and low vision research.

SUBMITTER: Faraji Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10616213 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A toolkit for wide-screen dynamic area of interest measurements using the Pupil Labs Core Eye Tracker.

Faraji Yasmin Y van Rijn Joris W JW van Nispen Ruth M A RMA van Rens Ger H M B GHMB Melis-Dankers Bart J M BJM Koopman Jan J van Rijn Laurentius J LJ

Behavior research methods 20221017 7

Eye tracking measurements taken while watching a wide field screen are challenging to perform. Commercially available remote eye trackers typically do not measure more than 35 degrees in eccentricity. Analysis software was developed using the Pupil Core Eye Tracking data to analyze viewing behavior under circumstances as natural as possible, on a 1.55-m-wide screen allowing free head movements. Additionally, dynamic area of interest (AOI) analyses were performed on data of participants viewing t ...[more]

PMID: 36253600

Similar Datasets

Project description:Eye-tracking experiments rely heavily on good data quality of eye-trackers. Unfortunately, it is often the case that only the spatial accuracy and precision values are available from the manufacturers. These two values alone are not sufficient to serve as a benchmark for an eye-tracker: Eye-tracking quality deteriorates during an experimental session due to head movements, changing illumination or calibration decay. Additionally, different experimental paradigms require the analysis of different types of eye movements; for instance, smooth pursuit movements, blinks or microsaccades, which themselves cannot readily be evaluated by using spatial accuracy or precision alone. To obtain a more comprehensive description of properties, we developed an extensive eye-tracking test battery. In 10 different tasks, we evaluated eye-tracking related measures such as: the decay of accuracy, fixation durations, pupil dilation, smooth pursuit movement, microsaccade classification, blink classification, or the influence of head motion. For some measures, true theoretical values exist. For others, a relative comparison to a reference eye-tracker is needed. Therefore, we collected our gaze data simultaneously from a remote EyeLink 1000 eye-tracker as the reference and compared it with the mobile Pupil Labs glasses. As expected, the average spatial accuracy of 0.57° for the EyeLink 1000 eye-tracker was better than the 0.82° for the Pupil Labs glasses (N = 15). Furthermore, we classified less fixations and shorter saccade durations for the Pupil Labs glasses. Similarly, we found fewer microsaccades using the Pupil Labs glasses. The accuracy over time decayed only slightly for the EyeLink 1000, but strongly for the Pupil Labs glasses. Finally, we observed that the measured pupil diameters differed between eye-trackers on the individual subject level but not on the group level. To conclude, our eye-tracking test battery offers 10 tasks that allow us to benchmark the many parameters of interest in stereotypical eye-tracking situations and addresses a common source of confounds in measurement errors (e.g., yaw and roll head movements). All recorded eye-tracking data (including Pupil Labs' eye videos), the stimulus code for the test battery, and the modular analysis pipeline are freely available (https://github.com/behinger/etcomp).

Project description:BackgroundTo objectively measure with an eye tracker both eye movement conjugacy and gaze direction in different positions when performing the Hess Lancaster Screen Test (HLST) in a sample of control subjects without binocular dysfunction and compare the results with those of the traditional subjective HLST performance.MethodsThe sample was selected avoiding subjects who suffered from suppression of one of the two eyes, visual acuity less than 20/25 on the Snellen chart in each eye, strabismus, or any symptom of binocular dysfunction that could alter the results. While performing the HLST, the examiner wrote down each of the points on a template in a traditional way while the eye tracker (Tobii Pro Fusion, Tobii AB, Danderyd, Sweden), placed in front of the subject, took objective measurements of the position of both eyes at each point. Of the 29 subjects recruited in this study, 13 subjects between 18 and 27 years old underwent the complete optometric examination and the HLST wearing anaglyph glasses; meanwhile, 16 people were excluded because of binocular or accommodative dysfunctions or because they didn't give reliable eye-tracking results. Additionally, a specific program called Etracker Parse Video (University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain) was developed to analyse the prismatic deviation between both eyes at each evaluated point.ResultsSimilar horizontal prismatic deviations of visual axes were obtained in the different gaze positions with the Maddox rod, the manually annotated HLST, and the eye-tracker measurement. Variations were found in the magnitude of the deviation between methods but not in the direction. On the other hand, vertical deviations were more difficult for the examiner to detect and quantify, especially those with small magnitudes; more exact values were obtained when measuring objectively with the eye tracker.ConclusionThe HLST is very useful and allows the amount of heterophoria or heterotropia to be recorded in the patient's medical record in all the main gaze positions. This test is complementary; by itself, it is not diagnostic and does not replace a complete examination of binocular vision. The eye tracker is an objective method with which we can evaluate the HLST in patients with no binocular problems, obtaining more accurate results than when it is performed in the traditional manner.

Dataset Information

A toolkit for wide-screen dynamic area of interest measurements using the Pupil Labs Core Eye Tracker.

Publications

A toolkit for wide-screen dynamic area of interest measurements using the Pupil Labs Core Eye Tracker.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets