Technological advances and decreases in cost have allowed eye trackers to become available to a wider range of industries. This research sought to examine the accuracy of a mid-range eye tracker while viewing small and large targets on two static mounts. Total dwell time was collected for 16 participants with the tripod-mount and laptop-mount. The results indicated that the size of the target significantly affects the accuracy, however the type of mount did not affect the accuracy. The findings indicate that either mount type can be used as long as defined Areas of Interest (AOI) are large enough for successful detection.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BojkoA. (2013). Eye tracking the user experience: A practical guide to research. Brooklyn, NY: Rosenfeld Media.
2.
DonovanT.LitchfieldD. (2012). Looking for cancer: Expertise related differences in searching and decision making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27 (1), 43-49.
3.
HolmqvistK. (2017) Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods, paradigms, and measures. Lund, Sweden: Lund Eye-Tracking Research Institute.
4.
MeißnerM.OllJ. (2017). The promise of eye-tracking methodology in organizational research: A taxonomy, review, and future avenues. Organizational Research Methods. doi: 10.1177/1094428112452151
5.
NiehorsterD. C.CornelissenT. H. W.HolmqvistK.HoogeI. T. C.HesselsR. S. (2017). What to expect from your remote eye-tracker when participants are unrestrained. Behavior Research Methods, 50 (1), 213-227.
6.
OrquinJ. L.HolmqvistK. (2018). Threats to the validity of eye-movement research in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, 50 (4). 1645-1656.
