Eye movements are strongly influenced by the task given to an observer. The
immediacy of such eye movements, which are difficult to control consciously,
offers the potential to explore highly variable subjective evaluations, such as
aesthetic preference, with reliable objective measures. We presented a variety
of images in sets of 2, 4, or 8 items for different durations and analyzed
oculomotor statistics such as cumulative fixation duration, refixations, and the
sequence of fixations while participants searched for their preferred image,
after which participants indicated their preference using a button press. The
total amount of time spent looking at any image correlates with selection
preference and does so increasingly well with longer presentation duration. For
short presentations, the first and last fixations correlate better with image
preference. All response measures become increasingly variable as the number and
complexity of presented images are increased. A weighted combination of these
measures can significantly improve the correlation with preference, suggesting a
“signature” which could be used as a reliable indicator for task-free subjective
evaluation of stimuli in visual psychophysics. Its role as an improved fitness
function in visually driven evolutionary algorithms is discussed.
AguirreG.
K.ZarahnE.D'EspositoM.
(1998). An area within human ventral cortex
sensitive to “building” stimuli: Evidence and implications.
Neuron, 21,
373–383. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80546-2
◂
2.
AntesJ.
R. (1974).
The time course of picture viewing.
Journal of Experimental Psychology,
103(1), 62–70.
doi:10.1037/h0036799 ◂
3.
ArnheimR.
(1974). Art and visual perception: The new
version. Berkley, CA:
University of California Press
◂
4.
BentleyP.
J. (1999).
Evolutionary design by computers. San
Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann
Inc.. doi:10.1017/S0890060499133018 ◂
5.
BerlyneD.
E. (1971).
Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York,
NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts
◂
6.
BiedermanIVesselE.
A. (2006).
Perceptual pleasure and the brain.
American Scientist, 94 (May-June),
249–255. doi:10.1511/2006.59.995
◂
7.
BuswellG.
T. (1935). How
people look at pictures: A study of the psychology of perception in
art. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press
◂
8.
CarbonC-C.HutzlerF.MingeM.
(2006). Innovativeness in design investigated by
eye-movements and pupilometry. Psychology
Science, 48(2),
173–186. ◂
9.
ConnorC.
E.EgethH. E.YantisS.
(2004). Visual attention bottom-up versus
top-down. Current Biology,
14(19),
850–852. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.09.041
◂
10.
DobsonV.
(1983). Clinical applications of preferential
looking measures of visual acuity. Behavioural Brain
Research, 10, 25–38.
doi:10.1016/0166-4328(83)90147-X ◂
11.
DuncanJ.HumphreysG.
W. (1989).
Visual search and stimulus similarity.
Psychological Review,
96(3), 433–458.
doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.433 ◂
12.
GlaholtM.
G.ReingoldE.
M. (2009).
Stimulus exposure and gaze bias: A further test of the gaze
cascade model. Attention Perception
Psychophysics, 71(3),
445–450. doi:10.3758/APP71.3.445
◂
13.
GoldbergD.
E. (1989).
Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine
learning. Boston, MA:
Addison-Wesley Longman Inc
◂
14.
HassenzahlM.
(2008). Aesthetics in interactive products:
Correlates and consequences of beauty. In SchiffersteinH. N.
J.HekkertP.
(Eds.), Product experience (pp.
287–302). Amsterdam, the
Netherlands: Elsevier.
doi:10.1016/B978-008045089-6.50013-7 ◂
15.
HendersonJ.
M. (2003).
Human gaze control during real-world scene
perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
7(11) 498–504.
doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.006 ◂
16.
HendersonJ.
M.HollingworthA.
(1998). Eye movements during scene viewing: An
overview. In UnderwoodG.
(Ed.), Eye guidance in reading in scene perception (pp.
269–293). Amsterdam, the
Netherlands: Elsevier.
doi:10.1016/B978-008043361-5/50002-X ◂
17.
HollandJ.
H. (1975).
Adaptation in natural and artificial systems.
Cambridge MA: MIT
Press ◂
HolmesT.ZankerJ.
(2008). Eye on the prize: Using overt visual attention
to drive fitness for interactive evolutionary computation. Paper
presented at the Eighth Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary
Computation, Seattle, WA, 1531–1538 doi: 10.1145/1389095.1389390
◂
20.
Houston-PriceC.NakaiS.
(2004). Distinguishing novelty and familiarity
effects in infant preference procedures. Infant and
Child Development, 13(4),
341–348. doi:10.1002/icd.381
◂
21.
IttiL.KochC.
(2000). A saliency-based search mechanism for
overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision
Research, 40(10–12),
1489–1506. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(99)00163-7
◂
22.
LandM.
F. (2007).
Fixation strategies during active behavior: A brief
history. In van GompelR. P.
G.FischerM. H.MurrayW. S.HillR.
L. (Eds.), Eye movements: A
window on mind and brain. (pp.
75–95). Oxford,
England: Elsevier.
doi:10.1016/B978-008044980-7/50006-9 ◂
23.
LandM.
F.FurneauxS.
(1997). The knowledge base of the oculomotor
system. Philosophical Transactions: Biological
Sciences, 352(1358),
1231–1239. doi:10.1098/rstb.1997.0105
◂
24.
LevyI.HassonU.AvidanG.HendlerT.MalachR.
(2001). Center-periphery organization of human
object areas. Nature Neuroscience,
4(5), 533–539.
doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(01)92231-1 ◂
25.
LocherP.
J.KrupinskiE. A.Mello-ThomsC.NodineC.
F. (2007).
Visual interest in pictorial art during an aesthetic
experience. Spatial Vision,
21(1–2),
55–77. doi:10.1163/156856807782753868
◂
26.
NisbettR.
E.WilsonT.
D. (1977).
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental
processes. Psychological Review,
84(3),
231–259. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231
◂
27.
PannaschS.HelmertJ. R.RothK.HerboldA. K.WalterH.
(2008). Visual fixation durations and saccade
amplitudes: Shifting relationship in a variety of
conditions. Journal of Eye Movement Research,
2(2), 1–19
◂
28.
PietersR.WarlopL.
(1999). Visual attention during brand choice:
The impact of time pressure and task motivation.
International Journal of Research in Marketing,
16(1), 1–16.
doi:10.1016/S0167-8116(98)00022-6 ◂
29.
PlumhoffJ.
E.SchirilloJ.
A. (2009).
Mondrian, eye movements, and the oblique
effect. Perception,
38(5),
719–731. doi:10.1068/p6160 ◂
30.
RaynerK.
(1998). Eye movements in reading and information
processing: 20 years of research. Psychological
Bulletin, 124(3),
372–422. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
◂
31.
RaynerK.PollatsekA.
(1992). Eye movements and scene
perception. Canadian Journal of Psychology,
46, 342–376.
doi:10.1037/h0084328 ◂
32.
SantellaA.DeCarloD.
(2004). Robust clustering of eye movement
recordings for quantification of visual interest. In
DuchowskiA.
T.VertegaalR.(Chair),
Proceedings of the Eye Tracking Research and Applications (ETRA)
Symposium 2004 (pp. 27–34).
New York, NY:
ACM.. doi:10.1145/968363.968368
◂
33.
ShenJ.ElahipanahA.ReingoldE.
M. (2007).
Effects of context and instruction on the guidance of eye
movements during a conjunctive visual search task. In
Van
GompelR. P. G.FischerM. H.MurrayW. S.HillR.
L. (Eds.), Eye movements: A
window on mind and brain. (pp.
75–95). Oxford,
England: Elsevier.
doi:10.1016/B978-008044980-7/50030-6 ◂
34.
ShimojoS.SimionC.ShimojoE.ScheierC.
(2003). Gaze bias both reflects and influences
preference. Nature Neuroscience,
6(12),
1317–1322. doi:10.1038/nn1150
◂
35.
StrattonG.
M. (1906).
Symmetry, linear illusions and the movements of the
eye. Psychological Review,
13, 82–96.
doi:10.1037/h0072441 ◂
36.
TakagiH.
(1998). Interactive evolutionary computation: System
optimization based on human subjective evaluation. Paper presented
at the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems (INES
'98), New York, NY. (pp. 2933–2966).
doi:10.1145/1274000.1274100 ◂
37.
TakagiH.
(2001). Interactive evolutionary computation:
Fusion of the capabilities of EC optimization and human
evaluation. Proceedings of the IEEE,
89(9),
1275–1296. doi:10.1109/5.949485
◂
38.
TakagiH.
(2009). New IEC research and
frameworks. In KacprzykJ.,
(Ed) Studies in “computational intelligence”. (pp.
65–76). Berlin,
Germany: Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03633-0_4 ◂
39.
TatlerB.
W.BaddeleyR. J.GilchristI.
D. (2005).
Visual correlates of fixation selection: Effects of scale and
time. Vision Research, 45,
643–659. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2004.09.017
◂
40.
TatlerB.
W.HayhoeM. M.LandM. F.BallardD.
H. (2011).
Eye guidance in natural vision: Reinterpreting
salience. Journal of Vision,
11(5), 1–23.
doi:10.1167/11.5.5 ◂
41.
TatlerB.
W.WadeN. J.KaulardK.
(2007). Examining art: Dissociating pattern and
perceptual influences on oculomotor behaviour.
Spatial Vision, 21(1–2),
165–184. doi:10.1163/156856807782753903
◂
42.
TellerD.
Y. (1979).
The forced-choice preferential looking procedure: A
psychophysical technique for use with human infants.
Infant Behavior & Development, 2,
135–153. doi:10.1016/S0163-6383(79)80016-8
◂
43.
Van der
LansRPietersRWedelM.
(2008). Competitive brand
salience. Marketing Science Articles in
Advance, 1–10.
doi:10.1287/mksc.1070.0327 ◂
44.
VelichkovskyB.
M.JoosM.HelmertJ. R.PannaschS.
(2005). Two visual systems and their eye
movements: Evidence from static and dynamic scene
perception. In BaraB.
G.BarsalouL.BucciarelliM.
(Eds.), Proceedings of the XXVII Conference of the Cognitive Science
Society. (pp. 2283–2288).
Stresa,
Italy ◂
45.
WoodingD.
S. (2002).
Eye movements of large populations: II Deriving regions of
interest, coverage, and similarity using fixation maps.
Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers,
34(4),
518–528. doi:10.3758/BF03195481 ◂
46.
WoodingD.
S.MugglestoneM. D.PurdyK. J.GaleA.
G. (2002).
Eye movements of large populations: I. Implementation and
performance of an autonomous public eye tracker.
Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers,
34(4),
509–517. doi:10.3758/BF03195480 ◂
47.
YarbusA.
L. (1967). Eye
movements and vision. New York NY:
Plenum Press ◂
48.
ZankerJ.VoigtK.HolmesT.
(2010). Evolving illusory motion using
eye-movements. Journal of Vision,
10(7), 162.
doi:10.1167/10.7.162 ◂
