Visuospatial tasks involve varied eye behaviors such as rapid visual search, fixations, and pupil adjustments. Understanding how eye-tracking metrics change during visuospatial tasks of varying complexity provides valuable insights into cognitive processes related to task complexity. This study explores the differences in eye-tracking metrics between simple and complex visuospatial tasks. This study was conducted in a controlled laboratory setting with a cohort of 20 university students who built two Lego models as simple and complex tasks. The analysis included eye-tracking metrics, such as saccades and fixations, pupil diameter, and blink rate. The findings indicated that the simple task resulted in a significantly longer fixation duration and larger pupil diameter, with a declining trend compared to the complex task. However, the blink duration and blink rate per minute showed no significant differences between the two tasks. These results suggest that eye-tracking metrics effectively capture visual behavioral differences associated with visuospatial task complexity.
BabályB.KárpátiA. (2016). The impact of creative construction tasks on visuospatial information processing and problem solving. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 13(7), 159–180. https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.13.7.2016.7.9
2.
BiondiF. N.SaberiB.GrafF.CortJ.PillaiP.BalasingamB. (2023). Distracted worker: Using pupil size and blink rate to detect cognitive load during manufacturing tasks. Applied Ergonomics, 106, 103867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103867
3.
BorysM.Plechawska-WójcikM. (2017). Eye-tracking metrics in perception and visual attention research. European Journal of Medical Technologies, 3, 11–23.
4.
BylinskiiZ.BorkinM. A.KimN. W.PfisterH.OlivaA. (2017). Eye fixation metrics for large scale evaluation and comparison of information visualizations [Paper presentation]. Eye Tracking and Visualization: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications (ETVIS 2015, Vol. 1, pp. 235–255). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47024-5_14
5.
ČegovnikT.StojmenovaK.JakusG.SodnikJ. (2018). An analysis of the suitability of a low-cost eye tracker for assessing the cognitive load of drivers. Applied Ergonomics, 68, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.10.011
6.
ChanL. K.ChanW. W. (2022). Target-rate effect in continuous visual search. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 7(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00392-8
7.
ChenS.EppsJ.PaasF. (2023). Pupillometric and blink measures of diverse task loads: Implications for working memory models. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 318–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12577
8.
DanE. L.DînşoreanuM.MureşanR. C. (2020). Accuracy of six interpolation methods applied on pupil diameter data [Conference session]. 2020 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (AQTR) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/AQTR49680.2020.9129915
ForoughiC. K.SibleyC.CoyneJ. T. (2017). Pupil size as a measure of within-task learning. Psychophysiology, 54(10), 1436–1443. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12896
11.
GravesJ. E.EgréP.PressnitzerD.de GardelleV. (2021). An implicit representation of stimulus ambiguity in pupil size. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(48), e2107997118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107997118
12.
GuoQ.ChenY. (2023). The effects of visual complexity and task difficulty on the comprehensive cognitive efficiency of cluster separation tasks. Behavioral Sciences, 13(10), 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13100827
13.
HershmanR.HenikA.CohenN. (2018). A novel blink detection method based on pupillometry noise. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 107–114.
14.
HollanderJ.HuetteS. (2022). Extracting blinks from continuous eye-tracking data in a mind-wandering paradigm. Consciousness and Cognition, 100, 103303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2022.103303
15.
HoogeI. T. C.ErkelensC. J. (1996). Control of fixation duration in a simple search task. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 969–976.
LecerfT.de RibaupierreA. (2005). Recognition in a visuospatial memory task: The effect of presentation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(1), 47–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440340000420
18.
LiuD.ChenX.ChungK. K. (2015). Performance in a visual search task uniquely predicts reading abilities in third-grade Hong Kong Chinese children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(4), 307–324.
19.
MaffeiA.AngrilliA. (2019). Spontaneous blink rate as an index of attention and emotion during film clips viewing. Physiology & Behavior, 204, 256–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.02.037
20.
ManassiM.KristjánssonÁ.WhitneyD. (2019). Serial dependence in a simulated clinical visual search task. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 19937.
21.
MathôtS.VilotijevićA. (2023). Methods in cognitive pupillometry: Design, preprocessing, and statistical analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 55(6), 3055–3077. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01957-7
22.
NegiS.MitraR. (2020). Fixation duration and the learning process: An eye tracking study with subtitled videos. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 13(6), 10–16910. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.13.6.1
23.
RichardsonM.JonesG.TorranceM. (2004). Identifying the task variables that influence perceived object assembly complexity. Ergonomics, 47(9), 945–964. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130410001686339
24.
SanchezC. A. (2012). Enhancing visuospatial performance through video game training to increase learning in visuospatial science domains. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 58–65. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0177-7
25.
TanakaY.YamaokaK. (1993). Blink activity and task difficulty. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77(1), 55–66.
26.
Van der WelP.Van SteenbergenH. (2018). Pupil dilation as an index of effort in cognitive control tasks: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 2005–2015. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1432-y
27.
VelichkovskyB. B.KhromovN.KorotinA.BurnaevE.SomovA. (2019). Visual fixations duration as an indicator of skill level in eSports [Conference session]. Human-Computer Interaction–INTERACT 2019: Proceedings of the 17th IFIP TC 13 International Conference (pp. 397–405). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29381-9_25
28.
WatsonM. R.BrennanA. A.KingstoneA.EnnsJ. T. (2010). Looking versus seeing: Strategies alter eye movements during visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(4), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.4.543
