眼动交互中边框和视标对作业绩效的影响研究

研究人计算机界面设计中的眼动交互反馈方式,为优化基于视线追踪技术的人计算机界面设计提供工效学依据。12名被试在交互对象有无边框提示和当前注视位置有无视标反馈的四种组合条件下,通过眼动交互完成目标选择任务,由计算机自动记录作业时间、选择错误和超时数目。结果发现,有无当前注视位置的视标反馈对作业时间有显著影响,有视标反馈可加速目标字母的搜索与定位过程和目标激活过程,由视标反馈所产生的作业时间下降,主要由目标定位时间的缩短所致;边框提示对用户的作业绩效无显著影响。根据上述结果可得以下结论:对当前注视位置提供视标反馈是一种有效的反馈方式,基于视线追踪的人机交互系统应为用户提供这种反馈信息。     

视线辅助气泡光标精确定位的工效学研究

针对视线交互技术中的点击定位问题,本研究在视线辅助点击技术的基础上引入气泡光标技术,提出了视线辅助气泡光标技术,并考察了该技术在精确定位方面的作用。结果显示:(1)视线辅助气泡光标的点击操作绩效显著优于手控尖点光标,并且时间知觉更低;(2)视线辅助气泡光标的点击操作时间显著慢于手控气泡光标,并且主观努力程度更高;3)目标位置对三种光标类型的操作绩效均有显著影响,且对视线辅助气泡光标的影响作用最大。本研究的结果为视线辅助点击技术的优化提供了新思路。     

人脸图形识别取样的眼动特征

通过眼动数据的分析,探讨人脸图形识别的取样特征。实验为2×2的被试内设计,自变量为显示条件（良好显示和不良显示）和显示方式（旋转显示和非旋转显示）。实验的因变量有反应时、总注视时间、注视比率、首视点注视时间、注视点数量、扫视总距离、扫视平均距离、正确率等8个指标。被试为12名大学生,刺激材料为10幅中国人脸部图形,主要实验设备是一台Eyelinkll型服动仪。结果发现,显示条件和显示方式对人脸图形识别绩效的影响显著;随着作业难度加大,被试图形识别的首视点注视时间显著增加;人脸图形识别中,显示条件对信息取样注视比率影响显著．而显示方式显著影响信息取样点数量．     

项目突显方式对视觉搜索策略的影响

搜索策略是将视觉注意导引到目标最可能出现位置的直接认知控制。本研究采用眼动跟踪技术与视觉搜索时间——鼠标点击时间的分离技术,探讨计算机视觉界面不同项目突显方式下的搜索策略问题。结果表明：（1）有无项目突显方式、不同的突显有效性水平,被试采用了导向式和序列式两种不同的搜索策略;（2）被试采用导向式搜索策略时,被试在第一个感兴趣区域首注视点百分比小于58.3％,在视觉搜索过程中的注视点数量明显较小、扫视轨迹长度和注视时间明显较少;（3）被试采用序列式搜索策略时,被试在第一个感兴趣区域首注视点百分比大于58.3％,在视觉搜索过程中的注视点数量明显较多、扫视轨迹长度和注视时间明显较长;（4）采用导向式的视觉搜索策略能显著减少被试的视觉搜索时间,提高视觉搜索的绩效,但不能显著减少被试的鼠标点击时间;（5）因为视觉界面上突显的设置改变了用户的搜索策略,所以提高了视觉搜索绩效。     

眼动交互中对象排列方式对作业绩效的影响

由于人眼注视的方位能够表达用户的兴趣中心等信息,使得基于眼动的用户界面备受关注,同时眼动也成为攫取当前认知加工过程的一个窗口。本研究采用２排列方式×６目标项位置的被试内设计,主要考察了眼动人机界面中交互对象的不同空间排列方式及目标项位置对选择工效的影响,以期为设计和优化基于视线追踪的人机交互界面的布局提供心理学依据。所获得的主要结论如下：（1）在基于视线追踪的人机交互中,对象水平排列方式优于垂直排列方式;（2）不同对象排列方式影响目标项位置对作业时间的效应模式,对象水平排列时,作业时间随着目标位置右移而线性递增;垂直排列时,作业时间随目标位置下移以非线性方式递增;（3）目标项位置仅影响目标定位时间,目标激活时间不受对象空间排列方式和目标项位置的影响;（4）基于视线追踪的人机交互系统其对象排列方式以水平方式为宜     

视觉信息呈现材料对视线突显技术的影响作用

本研究选取了基于视线追踪的视线突显技术作为研究对象,探究视觉信息呈现材料对不同视线突显技术的影响作用。结果表明：1）相比无突显,两种视线突显技术在搜索中均能提高操作绩效;2）视线矩阵突显技术在提高搜索速度上更优于视线单项突显技术;3）视线矩阵突显技术均能提高两种词频词组的搜索绩效,而低频词组搜索时,视线单项突显技术下的搜索正确率最优。本研究进一步考察了视线突显技术规律特点,为其实际应用提供理论依据和设计思路。     

道路交通标志中对称结构效应的眼动研究

本研究考察了道路交通标志中路名信息对称结构效应的眼动模式。实验采用眼动跟踪技术和视觉搜索范式,共有16名被试参加。实验结果表明：（1）在对称结构路名信息的视觉搜索中,被试的反应正确率明显优于非对称结构条件下的正确率;（2）对称结构条件下,被试的注视点和回扫次数明显较少,凝视时间明显较短;（3）在以道路交通标志为视觉搜索材料时,搜索区有无路名目标对视觉搜索绩效没有影响。可以认为：在道路交通标志中存在对称结构效应;眼动模式的差异是引起对称结构效应的认知机制。     

结构、任务类型和导航对超文本信息搜索的影响

通过两个实验考察了结构、任务类型和导航对超文本信息搜索绩效的影响。实验一采用2（层次结构,混合结构）×2（特定任务,关系任务）的被试内设计,探讨了超文本结构和任务类型对信息搜索的影响;实验二在实验一的基础上,采用2（层次结构,混合结构）×2（有导航图,无导航图）的被试内设计,考察超文本结构和导航对关系任务信息搜索的影响。结果表明：（1）超文本结构和任务类型对信息搜索绩效有显著的交互影响,就关系任务而言,混合结构超文本优于层次结构超文本,但就特定任务而言,两者无显著差异;（2）导航对信息搜索行为有指导作用,尤其对层次结构超文本有利;（3）两种主观指标的结果与客观指标存在一定程度的一致性。     

内源性眼跳前的空间注意转移

采用线运动错觉(illusory line motion)测量的单任务范式,以色块为眼跳提示刺激,用三个实验对内源性眼跳前是否存在空间注意转移进行了探讨。实验一要求被试将眼睛跳往提示刺激处,通过对线运动错觉的分析确定该条件下的空间注意转移规律;实验二要求被试在将视线保持在注视点处的条件下判断目标色块是否出现,以探明线运动错觉是否受对目标色块前注意阶段加工的影响;实验三要求被试将眼睛跳往提示刺激的对侧,分析眼跳位置与提示刺激空间方位的一致性对空间注意转移的影响。获得以下主要结果：(1)内源性眼跳前存在注意转移;(2)在视线保持在注视点处的条件下,注意未受对提示刺激前注意加工的引导;(3)眼跳目标位置与提示目标位置的空间一致性对眼跳前空间注意转移无显著影响。     

自适应气泡光标——基于用户的点击增强技术

本研究选取了气泡光标这种典型的点击增强技术作为研究对象,从用户操作习惯和特点出发,提出基于频次算法的和基于时间算法的自适应气泡光标,并试图通过实验研究来探索这两款自适应气泡光标的影响作用。结果显示:(1)基于频次算法的和基于时间算法的自适应气泡光标在操作绩效和主观评价上均显著优于气泡光标;(2)两款自适应气泡光标在操作绩效和主观评价上无显著差异。本研究的结果为点击增强技术的设计优化提供了新的设计思路。     

Straight gaze facilitates face processing but does not cause involuntary attentional capture

This study aimed to investigate the conditions under which eyes with a straight gaze capture attention more than eyes with an averted gaze, a phenomenon called the stare-in-the-crowd effect. In Experiment 1, we measured attentional capture by distractor faces with either straight or averted gaze that were shown among faces with closed eyes. Gaze direction of the distractor face was irrelevant because participants searched for a tilted face and indicated its gender. The presence of the distractor face with open eyes resulted in slower reaction times, but gaze direction had no effect, suggesting that straight gaze does not result in more involuntary attentional capture than averted gaze. In three further experiments with the same stimuli, the gaze direction of the target, and not the distractor, was varied. Better performance with straight than averted gaze of the target face was observed when the gaze direction or gender of the target face had to be discriminated. However, no difference between straight and averted was observed when only the presence of a face with open eyes had to be detected. Thus, the stare-in-the crowd effect is only observed when eye gaze is selected as part of the target and only when features of the face have to be discriminated. Our findings suggest that preference for straight gaze bears on target-related processes rather than on attentional capture per se.     

Observation of another's action but not eye gaze triggers allocentric visual perspective

In the present paper, we investigated whether observation of bodily cues—that is, hand action and eye gaze—can modulate the onlooker's visual perspective taking. Participants were presented with scenes of an actor gazing at an object (or straight ahead) and grasping an object (or not) in a 2?×?2 factorial design and a control condition with no actor in the scene. In Experiment 1, two groups of subjects were explicitly required to judge the left/right location of the target from their own (egocentric group) or the actor's (allocentric group) point of view, whereas in Experiment 2 participants did not receive any instruction on the point of view to assume. In both experiments, allocentric coding (i.e., the actor's point of view) was triggered when the actor grasped the target, but not when he gazed towards it, or when he adopted a neutral posture. In Experiment 3, we demonstrate that the actor's gaze but not action affected participants' attention orienting. The different effects of others' grasping and eye gaze on observers' behaviour demonstrated that specific bodily cues convey distinctive information about other people's intentions.     

Limitations of gaze transfer: Without visual context,eye movements do not to help to coordinate joint action,whereas mouse movements do

Remote cooperation can be improved by transferring the gaze of one participant to the other. However, based on a partner's gaze, an interpretation of his communicative intention can be difficult. Thus, gaze transfer has been inferior to mouse transfer in remote spatial referencing tasks where locations had to be pointed out explicitly. Given that eye movements serve as an indicator of visual attention, it remains to be investigated whether gaze and mouse transfer differentially affect the coordination of joint action when the situation demands an understanding of the partner's search strategies. In the present study, a gaze or mouse cursor was transferred from a searcher to an assistant in a hierarchical decision task. The assistant could use this cursor to guide his movement of a window which continuously opened up the display parts the searcher needed to find the right solution. In this context, we investigated how the ease of using gaze transfer depended on whether a link could be established between the partner's eye movements and the objects he was looking at. Therefore, in addition to the searcher's cursor, the assistant either saw the positions of these objects or only a grey background. When the objects were visible, performance and the number of spoken words were similar for gaze and mouse transfer. However, without them, gaze transfer resulted in longer solution times and more verbal effort as participants relied more strongly on speech to coordinate the window movement. Moreover, an analysis of the spatio-temporal coupling of the transmitted cursor and the window indicated that when no visual object information was available, assistants confidently followed the searcher's mouse but not his gaze cursor. Once again, the results highlight the importance of carefully considering task characteristics when applying gaze transfer in remote cooperation.     

Gaze cueing as a function of perceived gaze direction

Previous studies have found that attention is automatically oriented in the direction of other people's gaze. This study directly investigated whether the perceiving gaze direction modulates the orienting of observers' attention. Gaze perception was manipulated by changing the face context (head orientation) of the gaze cue: the perceived gaze angle was increased (or decreased) when the head and gaze are congruent (or incongruent), while the local‐feature information of the eye region was preserved for all stimuli. The results showed that gaze‐cueing effects were enhanced when the perceived gaze direction was averted more toward left or right, and reduced when the perceived gaze direction was closer to direct gaze. The results suggest that gaze‐cueing effects are based on mechanisms specialized for gaze perception, and the magnitude of gaze‐cueing effects was probably a function of the perceived gaze direction.     

Contrast polarity of eyes modulates gaze‐cueing effect1

Two experiments using a modified Posner‐type visual cueing paradigm tested the prediction that detecting the darker region of the eyes of another's gaze triggers a reflexive orienting of the observer in the direction of the gaze. A target was presented in the left or right visual‐field following a gaze‐cue with positive or negative‐image polarity (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, the polarity of the eyes was manipulated independently of the negative polarity of the face (eye‐positive or eye‐negative‐image polarity conditions). The results showed that the response to the target presented at the side the eyes gazed toward was faster than for the target presented at the other side in the positive polarity condition (Experiment 1), whereas, in the negative polarity condition, the gaze‐cuing effect was not found. In Experiment 2, in the eye‐negative condition, a reversed gaze‐cueing effect appeared, whereas in the eye‐positive polarity condition, a typical gaze‐cueing effect was obtained. These findings suggested that the reflexive orienting of the observer shifts toward the position indicated by the darker region of the other's eyes.     

Coordinating spatial referencing using shared gaze

To better understand the problem of referencing a location in space under time pressure, we had two remotely located partners (A, B) attempt to locate and reach consensus on a sniper target, which appeared randomly in the windows of buildings in a pseudorealistic city scene. The partners were able to communicate using speech alone (shared voice), gaze cursors alone (shared gaze), or both. In the shared-gaze conditions, a gaze cursor representing Partner A’s eye position was superimposed over Partner B’s search display and vice versa. Spatial referencing times (for both partners to find and agree on targets) were faster with shared gaze than with speech, with this benefit due primarily to faster consensus (less time needed for one partner to locate the target after it was located by the other partner). These results suggest that sharing gaze can be more efficient than speaking when people collaborate on tasks requiring the rapid communication of spatial information. Supplemental materials for this article may be downloaded from http://pbr.psychonomic-journals.org/content/supplemental.     

Children's knowledge of deceptive gaze cues and its relation to their actual lying behavior

Eye gaze plays a pivotal role during communication. When interacting deceptively, it is commonly believed that the deceiver will break eye contact and look downward. We examined whether children’s gaze behavior when lying is consistent with this belief. In our study, 7- to 15-year-olds and adults answered questions truthfully (Truth questions) or untruthfully (Lie questions) or answered questions that required thinking (Think questions). Younger participants (7- and 9-year-olds) broke eye contact significantly more when lying compared with other conditions. Also, their averted gaze when lying differed significantly from their gaze display in other conditions. In contrast, older participants did not differ in their durations of eye contact or averted gaze across conditions. Participants’ knowledge about eye gaze and deception increased with age. This knowledge significantly predicted their actual gaze behavior when lying. These findings suggest that with increased age, participants became increasingly sophisticated in their use of display rule knowledge to conceal their deception.