Computer Screen or Real Life?

Comparison of the Allocation of Visual Attention for 2D and 3D Stimuli

Research output: Contribution to conferenceConference abstract for conferenceResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Aims: In many disciplines, including consumer and marketing research, the findings from eyetracking studies in lab settings are often generalized to natural environments. While studies in the real world have become more common with a statement on increased external validity, the degree to which the allocation of visual attention actually depends on the study setting has not been investigated.
Methods: In this study we used a withinsubject design where identical stimuli were presented to 60 female participants in two settings: 1) mobile, and 2) stationary. This was done with an interval of one month and the participants were assigned a freeviewing, choice and memorisation task with the
manipulation of time pressure. The stimuli included displays of consumer goods and advertisements of different sizes.
Results: As expected, the results demonstrated significant differences in gaze behaviour between the two setups. In mobile settings visual salience was less predictive of eye movement selections and the dwell times were longer. The stationary presentation of stimuli resulted in considerable central fixation
bias and the locations of redwells were more spread out. The freeviewing
condition resulted in highest variability between the two settings, but decreased when tasks and time pressure were introduced.
Conclusions: These findings have ramifications for the deployment of eyetracking and help to transfer and generalise future findings acquired in lab settings to natural environments. In the context of marketing and consumer research this study uncovers the distortions in visual attention that result
from reducing a threedimensional setting into a twodimensional screen image.
Original languageEnglish
Publication date2016
Number of pages1
Publication statusPublished - 2016
Event10th FENS Forum of Neuroscience 2016 - København, Denmark
Duration: 2 Jul 20166 Jul 2016
Conference number: 10
http://forum2016.fens.org/

Conference

Conference10th FENS Forum of Neuroscience 2016
Number10
CountryDenmark
CityKøbenhavn
Period02/07/201606/07/2016
Internet address

Cite this

@conference{6822bf5216f84577bf1cd6b77d251307,
title = "Computer Screen or Real Life?: Comparison of the Allocation of Visual Attention for 2D and 3D Stimuli",
abstract = "Aims: In many disciplines, including consumer and marketing research, the findings from eyetracking studies in lab settings are often generalized to natural environments. While studies in the real world have become more common with a statement on increased external validity, the degree to which the allocation of visual attention actually depends on the study setting has not been investigated.Methods: In this study we used a withinsubject design where identical stimuli were presented to 60 female participants in two settings: 1) mobile, and 2) stationary. This was done with an interval of one month and the participants were assigned a freeviewing, choice and memorisation task with themanipulation of time pressure. The stimuli included displays of consumer goods and advertisements of different sizes.Results: As expected, the results demonstrated significant differences in gaze behaviour between the two setups. In mobile settings visual salience was less predictive of eye movement selections and the dwell times were longer. The stationary presentation of stimuli resulted in considerable central fixationbias and the locations of redwells were more spread out. The freeviewingcondition resulted in highest variability between the two settings, but decreased when tasks and time pressure were introduced.Conclusions: These findings have ramifications for the deployment of eyetracking and help to transfer and generalise future findings acquired in lab settings to natural environments. In the context of marketing and consumer research this study uncovers the distortions in visual attention that resultfrom reducing a threedimensional setting into a twodimensional screen image.",
author = "Seidi Suurmets and Jesper Clement",
year = "2016",
language = "English",
note = "null ; Conference date: 02-07-2016 Through 06-07-2016",
url = "http://forum2016.fens.org/",

}

Computer Screen or Real Life? Comparison of the Allocation of Visual Attention for 2D and 3D Stimuli. / Suurmets, Seidi; Clement, Jesper.

2016. Abstract from 10th FENS Forum of Neuroscience 2016, København, Denmark.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceConference abstract for conferenceResearchpeer-review

TY - ABST

T1 - Computer Screen or Real Life?

T2 - Comparison of the Allocation of Visual Attention for 2D and 3D Stimuli

AU - Suurmets, Seidi

AU - Clement, Jesper

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Aims: In many disciplines, including consumer and marketing research, the findings from eyetracking studies in lab settings are often generalized to natural environments. While studies in the real world have become more common with a statement on increased external validity, the degree to which the allocation of visual attention actually depends on the study setting has not been investigated.Methods: In this study we used a withinsubject design where identical stimuli were presented to 60 female participants in two settings: 1) mobile, and 2) stationary. This was done with an interval of one month and the participants were assigned a freeviewing, choice and memorisation task with themanipulation of time pressure. The stimuli included displays of consumer goods and advertisements of different sizes.Results: As expected, the results demonstrated significant differences in gaze behaviour between the two setups. In mobile settings visual salience was less predictive of eye movement selections and the dwell times were longer. The stationary presentation of stimuli resulted in considerable central fixationbias and the locations of redwells were more spread out. The freeviewingcondition resulted in highest variability between the two settings, but decreased when tasks and time pressure were introduced.Conclusions: These findings have ramifications for the deployment of eyetracking and help to transfer and generalise future findings acquired in lab settings to natural environments. In the context of marketing and consumer research this study uncovers the distortions in visual attention that resultfrom reducing a threedimensional setting into a twodimensional screen image.

AB - Aims: In many disciplines, including consumer and marketing research, the findings from eyetracking studies in lab settings are often generalized to natural environments. While studies in the real world have become more common with a statement on increased external validity, the degree to which the allocation of visual attention actually depends on the study setting has not been investigated.Methods: In this study we used a withinsubject design where identical stimuli were presented to 60 female participants in two settings: 1) mobile, and 2) stationary. This was done with an interval of one month and the participants were assigned a freeviewing, choice and memorisation task with themanipulation of time pressure. The stimuli included displays of consumer goods and advertisements of different sizes.Results: As expected, the results demonstrated significant differences in gaze behaviour between the two setups. In mobile settings visual salience was less predictive of eye movement selections and the dwell times were longer. The stationary presentation of stimuli resulted in considerable central fixationbias and the locations of redwells were more spread out. The freeviewingcondition resulted in highest variability between the two settings, but decreased when tasks and time pressure were introduced.Conclusions: These findings have ramifications for the deployment of eyetracking and help to transfer and generalise future findings acquired in lab settings to natural environments. In the context of marketing and consumer research this study uncovers the distortions in visual attention that resultfrom reducing a threedimensional setting into a twodimensional screen image.

M3 - Conference abstract for conference

ER -

Suurmets S, Clement J. Computer Screen or Real Life? Comparison of the Allocation of Visual Attention for 2D and 3D Stimuli. 2016. Abstract from 10th FENS Forum of Neuroscience 2016, København, Denmark.