ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Exploration of factors affecting webcam-based automated gaze coding.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing automated gaze classifiers in infant looking studies: Accuracy and vulnerability to environmental factors.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- The fundamentals of eye tracking part 4: Tools for conducting an eye tracking study.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online experiments have been transforming the field of behavioral research, enabling researchers to increase sample sizes, access diverse populations, lower the costs of data collection, and promote reproducibility. The field of developmental psychology increasingly exploits such online testing approaches. Since infants cannot give explicit behavioral responses, one key outcome measure is infants' gaze behavior. In the absence of automated eyetrackers in participants' homes, automatic gaze classification from webcam data would make it possible to avoid painstaking manual coding. However, the lack of a controlled experimental environment may lead to various noise factors impeding automatic face detection or gaze classification. We created an adult webcam dataset that systematically reproduced noise factors from infant webcam studies which might affect automated gaze coding accuracy. We varied participants' left-right offset, distance to the camera, facial rotation, and the direction of the lighting source. Running two state-of-the-art classification algorithms (iCatcher+ and OWLET) revealed that facial detection performance was particularly affected by the lighting source, while gaze coding accuracy was consistently affected by the distance to the camera and lighting source. Morphing participants' faces to be unidentifiable did not generally affect the results, suggesting facial anonymization could be used when making online video data publicly available, for purposes of further study and transparency. Our findings will guide improving study design for infant and adult participants during online experiments. Moreover, training algorithms using our dataset will allow researchers to improve robustness and allow developmental psychologists to leverage online testing more efficiently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.