Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33514767›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Evaluation of an eye tracking setup for studying visual attention in face-to-face conversations.

Antonia Vehlen, Ines Spenthof, Daniel Tönsing, Markus Heinrichs, Gregor Domes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. No added cost: Emotion recognition in co-occurring ADHD and ASD.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

5 authors.

Antonia Vehlen *Department of Biological and Clinical Psychology, University of Trier, Johanniterufer 15, 54290, Trier, Germany.
Ines Spenthof *Department of Psychology, Laboratory for Biological and Personality Psychology, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Stefan-Meier-Str. 8, 79104, Freiburg, Germany.
Daniel TönsingDepartment of Psychology, Laboratory for Biological and Personality Psychology, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Stefan-Meier-Str. 8, 79104, Freiburg, Germany.
Markus HeinrichsDepartment of Psychology, Laboratory for Biological and Personality Psychology, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Stefan-Meier-Str. 8, 79104, Freiburg, Germany. heinrichs@psychologie.uni-freiburg.de.
Gregor DomesDepartment of Biological and Clinical Psychology, University of Trier, Johanniterufer 15, 54290, Trier, Germany. domes@uni-trier.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many eye tracking studies use facial stimuli presented on a display to investigate attentional processing of social stimuli. To introduce a more realistic approach that allows interaction between two real people, we evaluated a new eye tracking setup in three independent studies in terms of data quality, short-term reliability and feasibility. Study 1 measured the robustness, precision and accuracy for calibration stimuli compared to a classical display-based setup. Study 2 used the identical measures with an independent study sample to compare the data quality for a photograph of a face (2D) and the face of the real person (3D). Study 3 evaluated data quality over the course of a real face-to-face conversation and examined the gaze behavior on the facial features of the conversation partner. Study 1 provides evidence that quality indices for the scene-based setup were comparable to those of a classical display-based setup. Average accuracy was better than 0.4° visual angle. Study 2 demonstrates that eye tracking quality is sufficient for 3D stimuli and robust against short interruptions without re-calibration. Study 3 confirms the long-term stability of tracking accuracy during a face-to-face interaction and demonstrates typical gaze patterns for facial features. Thus, the eye tracking setup presented here seems feasible for studying gaze behavior in dyadic face-to-face interactions. Eye tracking data obtained with this setup achieves an accuracy that is sufficient for investigating behavior such as eye contact in social interactions in a range of populations including clinical conditions, such as autism spectrum and social phobia.

Indexed as

AttentionCommunicationEye-Tracking TechnologyFixation, OcularInterpersonal RelationsAdultFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID33514767
PMCPMC7846602

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.