Search for: All records

Accurate eye tracking is crucial for gaze-dependent research, but calibrating eye trackers in subjects who cannot follow instructions, such as human infants and nonhuman primates, presents a challenge. Traditional calibration methods rely on verbal instructions, which are ineffective for these populations. To address this, researchers often use attention-grabbing stimuli in known locations; however, existing software for video-based calibration is often proprietary and inflexible. We introduce an extension to the open-source toolbox Titta—a software package integrating desktop Tobii eye trackers with PsychToolbox experiments—to facilitate custom video-based calibration. This toolbox extension offers a flexible platform for attracting attention, calibrating using flexible point selection, and validating the calibration. The toolbox has been refined through extensive use with chimpanzees, baboons, and macaques, demonstrating its effectiveness across species. Our adaptive calibration and validation procedures provide a standardized method for achieving more accurate gaze tracking, enhancing gaze accuracy across diverse species. 

A guideline is proposed that comprises the minimum items to be reported in research studies involving an eye tracker and human or non-human primate participant(s). This guideline was developed over a 3-year period using a consensus-based process via an open invitation to the international eye tracking community. This guideline will be reviewed at maximum intervals of 4 years. 

In this paper, we present a review of how the various aspects of any study using an eye tracker (such as the instrument, methodology, environment, participant, etc.) affect the quality of the recorded eye-tracking data and the obtained eye-movement and gaze measures. We take this review to represent the empirical foundation for reporting guidelines of any study involving an eye tracker. We compare this empirical foundation to five existing reporting guidelines and to a database of 207 published eye-tracking studies. We find that reporting guidelines vary substantially and do not match with actual reporting practices. We end by deriving a minimal, flexible reporting guideline based on empirical research (Section “An empirically based minimal reporting guideline”).