Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409984›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2021

Eye tracking in human interaction: Possibilities and limitations.

Niilo V Valtakari, Ignace T C Hooge, Charlotte Viktorsson, Pär Nyström, Terje Falck-Ytter, Roy S Hessels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Predicting fixations and gaze location from EEG.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Niilo V ValtakariExperimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584 CS, Utrecht, the Netherlands. niilovaltakari@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2813-4839
Ignace T C HoogeExperimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584 CS, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Charlotte ViktorssonDepartment of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Pär NyströmDepartment of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Terje Falck-YtterDepartment of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Roy S HesselsExperimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584 CS, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a long history of interest in looking behavior during human interaction. With the advance of (wearable) video-based eye trackers, it has become possible to measure gaze during many different interactions. We outline the different types of eye-tracking setups that currently exist to investigate gaze during interaction. The setups differ mainly with regard to the nature of the eye-tracking signal (head- or world-centered) and the freedom of movement allowed for the participants. These features place constraints on the research questions that can be answered about human interaction. We end with a decision tree to help researchers judge the appropriateness of specific setups.

Indexed as

Eye MovementsEye-Tracking TechnologyHeadHumansMovementData analysisData qualityEye trackingHuman interactionWearable

Identifiers

PMID33409984
PMCPMC7787418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.