(January 2008) Eye-Tracking Forum: "What should we make of this?"
Posted: January 10th, 2008 | Author: Robert Barlow-Busch | Filed under: Events | 1 Comment »Thursday January 17, 2008
5:00 to 6:30 pm
Please note we’re NOT at the Accelerator Centre this month:
Quarry Integrated Communications
Brand Experience Lab (Ground Floor)
180 King Street South, Waterloo
[Map]
Event description
Has eye-tracking “crossed the chasm” from cognitive science to a mainstream
professional tool for understanding and improving user experience with
digital interfaces? Is it a god-send or a gimmick? And has the usability
field seen such a polarizing discussion since the bickering began on sample
sizes?
This informal event will begin with a brief presentation on how eye-tracking
is currently being applied in Quarry’s usability practice, followed by a
panel discussion including practitioners and academics on the potentials and
pratfalls of this technique.
Confirmed speakers
- Dan Skeen, Quarry
- Blair Nonnecke, University of Guelph
- Glen Drummond, Quarry
Hi everyone!
I am Stefan Asanin, an undergraduate student at the Department of Computer and Systems Science in Stockholm (Stockholm University/Royal Institute of Technology). I found your site on random googling and found it worth posting in.
My desire with this post is to make some of you comment my undergraduate thesis work. I know the abstract might be heavy to interpret as it is but since my work is finishing of in the oncoming week I would be happy to receive some comments and thoughts regarding my findings. I will attach a miniabstract pdf file aswell the original text here below.
If you have read the text and want to comment it please e-mail me at
asanin@fc.dsv.su.se as soon as possible. Your comments will be presented at 17th September 2008 in Kista, Sweden. If it happens to be too many comments I will randomly pick out a few.
Please remember to state your position and name for reference!
Thank you all in advance!
/Stefan Asanin
“Abstract
The human interest in displaying another person’s gaze is one of the main reasons behind the development of eye tracking techniques. To be able to distinguish among visible objects on a screen gives the system great advantage in anticipating what object should be manipulated or what executable code snippet should run as a response. The conformed applicative ways spread interdisciplinary and because of this it also forms the essential presentation of a problem affiliated by this literature study. Eye tracking technology utilizes various goals with different approaches in which their users seem not to respond to the fact that interaction might occur under isolated points of time. First, there is the physiological response that takes place when a stimulus is presented. Secondly, that informative neurological path takes additional time whereby the conscious experience of that object is said to occur about 300 milliseconds later. Therefore, an interaction through an eye tracking system takes hold prior human knowledge and should be regarded as an essential aspect of design and system development. Still in terms of time, eye tracking developers apply certain
thresholds for distinguishing saccades from fixations but this is done without consideration of human consciousness delay. Therefore, the aim of the study was to elucidate the phenomenon that arises when various interdisciplinary approaches carry out experiments, developments or hypothesis declarations using eye tracking technologies. By reviewing a dozen of their articles the writer of this thesis work attempted to evaluate hidden variables indicating a loss of prudent time dependent aspects. A total of 15 articles were reviewed and the results showed that only one of them had complete scores and could therefore be stated to fulfill the writer’s demands on time dependent adjustments. At the same time, the consciousness dependent time variable had the least probability to disseminate over technical and design applicative variables. In conclusion,
because of the lack of consciousness delay dependent supplements the writer claims that these approximately 250 milliseconds in between stimulus onset and action possibly might render new ways to interpret applications for Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, Artificial Intelligence, in medicine examined deteriorated cognitive abilities or wherever eye tracking might be appreciated as a tool of interaction.”