Thanapoom Boonipat1, Tiffany L Brazile2, Oliver A Darwish3, Philip Montana2, Kevin K Fleming4, Mitchell A Stotland5. 1. Resident, Division of Plastic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 2. Medical Student, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH. 3. Undergraduate Student, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH. 4. Chair, Department of Psychology and Education, Norwich University, Northfield, VT. 5. Chief, Plastic and Craniofacial Surgery, Sidra Medicine and Weill Cornell Medical College-Qatar, Doha, Qatar. Electronic address: mstotland@sidra.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available regarding observers' visual attention to faces with congenital difference. We implemented eye tracking technology to examine this issue, as it pertains particularly to faces with cleft deformity. METHOD: Four hundred three observers assessed 273 clinical images, while their eye movements were unobtrusively tracked using an infrared sensor. Forty-one facial images of the repaired cleft lip, 137 images of other facial conditions, and 95 images of matched controls were assessed. Twenty facial regions of interest ("lookzones") were considered for all images observed. A separate cohort of 720 raters evaluated the images for attractiveness. Observer and image demographic information was collected. Visual fixation counts and durations were computed across all 20 lookzones for all images. The effect of a variety of variables on lookzone fixation was analyzed using factorial ANOVA testing. RESULTS: Cleft-repaired faces were rated as less attractive and drew observers' attention preferentially to the affected upper lip lookzone (p<.001). Images rated as less attractive garnered greater visual attention in the cleft-affected lookzones (p<.001). The eye tracking methodology demonstrated exquisite sensitivity to laterality of cleft deformity (p<.001). Individuals reporting a personal or a family history of facial deformity fixated more on the perioral region of cleft-repaired faces than did naïve observers (p<.001). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the utility of eye tracking measures for understanding critical variables that influence the visual processing of faces with cleft deformity. The data may provide analytical tools for assessing surgical outcome and direct priority setting during surgeons' conversations with patients.
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available regarding observers' visual attention to faces with congenital difference. We implemented eye tracking technology to examine this issue, as it pertains particularly to faces with cleft deformity. METHOD: Four hundred three observers assessed 273 clinical images, while their eye movements were unobtrusively tracked using an infrared sensor. Forty-one facial images of the repaired cleft lip, 137 images of other facial conditions, and 95 images of matched controls were assessed. Twenty facial regions of interest ("lookzones") were considered for all images observed. A separate cohort of 720 raters evaluated the images for attractiveness. Observer and image demographic information was collected. Visual fixation counts and durations were computed across all 20 lookzones for all images. The effect of a variety of variables on lookzone fixation was analyzed using factorial ANOVA testing. RESULTS:Cleft-repaired faces were rated as less attractive and drew observers' attention preferentially to the affected upper lip lookzone (p<.001). Images rated as less attractive garnered greater visual attention in the cleft-affected lookzones (p<.001). The eye tracking methodology demonstrated exquisite sensitivity to laterality of cleft deformity (p<.001). Individuals reporting a personal or a family history of facial deformity fixated more on the perioral region of cleft-repaired faces than did naïve observers (p<.001). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the utility of eye tracking measures for understanding critical variables that influence the visual processing of faces with cleft deformity. The data may provide analytical tools for assessing surgical outcome and direct priority setting during surgeons' conversations with patients.
Authors: Abdulrahman Takiddin; Mohammad Shaqfeh; Osman Boyaci; Erchin Serpedin; Mitchell A Stotland Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2022-01-18
Authors: Jacob K Dey; Lisa E Ishii; Kofi D O Boahene; Patrick J Byrne; Masaru Ishii Journal: JAMA Facial Plast Surg Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.611