Literature DB >> 24338446

Eye can read your mind: decoding gaze fixations to reveal categorical search targets.

Gregory J Zelinsky1, Yifan Peng, Dimitris Samaras.   

Abstract

Is it possible to infer a person's goal by decoding their fixations on objects? Two groups of participants categorically searched for either a teddy bear or butterfly among random category distractors, each rated as high, medium, or low in similarity to the target classes. Target-similar objects were preferentially fixated in both search tasks, demonstrating information about target category in looking behavior. Different participants then viewed the searchers' scanpaths, superimposed over the target-absent displays, and attempted to decode the target category (bear/butterfly). Bear searchers were classified perfectly; butterfly searchers were classified at 77%. Bear and butterfly Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifiers were also used to decode the same preferentially fixated objects and found to yield highly comparable classification rates. We conclude that information about a person's search goal exists in fixation behavior, and that this information can be behaviorally decoded to reveal a search target-essentially reading a person's mind by analyzing their fixations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  categorical search; classification; computer vision; decoding; fixation duration

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24338446      PMCID: PMC3862237          DOI: 10.1167/13.14.10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  24 in total

1.  Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks.

Authors:  F Gosselin; P G Schyns
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Similar neural representations of the target for saccades and perception during search.

Authors:  Miguel P Eckstein; Brent R Beutter; Binh T Pham; Steven S Shimozaki; Leland S Stone
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Probabilistic modeling of eye movement data during conjunction search via feature-based attention.

Authors:  Ueli Rutishauser; Christof Koch
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-04-12       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Search guidance is proportional to the categorical specificity of a target cue.

Authors:  Joseph Schmidt; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 2.143

5.  The guidance of eye movements during active visual search.

Authors:  B C Motter; E J Belky
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Visual similarity effects in categorical search.

Authors:  Robert G Alexander; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque.

Authors:  A M Derrington; J Krauskopf; P Lennie
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  The effects of target specification on objects fixated during visual search.

Authors:  L G Williams
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1967

9.  Searching Through the Hierarchy: How Level of Target Categorization Affects Visual Search.

Authors:  Justin T Maxfield; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2012-11-12

10.  Identifying natural images from human brain activity.

Authors:  Kendrick N Kay; Thomas Naselaris; Ryan J Prenger; Jack L Gallant
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-03-05       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  10 in total

1.  Effects of target typicality on categorical search.

Authors:  Justin T Maxfield; Westri D Stalder; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Using space to represent categories: insights from gaze position.

Authors:  Corinna S Martarelli; Sandra Chiquet; Bruno Laeng; Fred W Mast
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-06-15

3.  Target specificity improves search, but how universal is the benefit?

Authors:  Ashley M Ercolino; Pooja Patel; Corey Bohil; Mark B Neider; Joseph Schmidt
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Human classifier: Observers can deduce task solely from eye movements.

Authors:  Brett Bahle; Mark Mills; Michael D Dodd
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 5.  Using multidimensional scaling to quantify similarity in visual search and beyond.

Authors:  Michael C Hout; Hayward J Godwin; Gemma Fitzsimmons; Arryn Robbins; Tamaryn Menneer; Stephen D Goldinger
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Searching for Category-Consistent Features: A Computational Approach to Understanding Visual Category Representation.

Authors:  Chen-Ping Yu; Justin T Maxfield; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2016-05-03

7.  Understanding scene understanding.

Authors:  Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-12-19

8.  What Am I Looking at? Interpreting Dynamic and Static Gaze Displays.

Authors:  Margot van Wermeskerken; Damien Litchfield; Tamara van Gog
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2017-03-13

9.  Scanpath modeling and classification with hidden Markov models.

Authors:  Antoine Coutrot; Janet H Hsiao; Antoni B Chan
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2018-02

10.  Weighting the factors affecting attention guidance during free viewing and visual search: The unexpected role of object recognition uncertainty.

Authors:  Souradeep Chakraborty; Dimitris Samaras; Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 2.004

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.