低成本vs.高端眼动追踪可用性测试

Sune Alstrup Johansen, Javier San Agustin, H. Skovsgaard, J. P. Hansen, M. Tall
{"title":"低成本vs.高端眼动追踪可用性测试","authors":"Sune Alstrup Johansen, Javier San Agustin, H. Skovsgaard, J. P. Hansen, M. Tall","doi":"10.1145/1979742.1979744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accuracy of an open source remote eye tracking system and a state-of-the-art commercial eye tracker was measured 4 times during a usability test. Results from 9 participants showed both devices to be fairly stable over time, but the commercial tracker was more accurate with a mean error of 31 pixels against 59 pixels using the low cost system. This suggests that low cost eye tracking can become a viable alternative, when usability studies need not to distinguish between, for instance, particular words or menu items that participants are looking at, but only between larger areas-of-interest they pay attention to.","PeriodicalId":275462,"journal":{"name":"CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"51","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low cost vs. high-end eye tracking for usability testing\",\"authors\":\"Sune Alstrup Johansen, Javier San Agustin, H. Skovsgaard, J. P. Hansen, M. Tall\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1979742.1979744\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Accuracy of an open source remote eye tracking system and a state-of-the-art commercial eye tracker was measured 4 times during a usability test. Results from 9 participants showed both devices to be fairly stable over time, but the commercial tracker was more accurate with a mean error of 31 pixels against 59 pixels using the low cost system. This suggests that low cost eye tracking can become a viable alternative, when usability studies need not to distinguish between, for instance, particular words or menu items that participants are looking at, but only between larger areas-of-interest they pay attention to.\",\"PeriodicalId\":275462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"51\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979744\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979744","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 51

摘要

在可用性测试中,对开源远程眼动追踪系统和最先进的商用眼动追踪器的准确性进行了4次测量。9名参与者的结果显示,随着时间的推移,两种设备都相当稳定,但商业跟踪器更准确,平均误差为31像素,而使用低成本系统的平均误差为59像素。这表明,当可用性研究不需要区分参与者正在看的特定单词或菜单项,而只需要区分他们关注的更大的兴趣区域时,低成本的眼动追踪可以成为一种可行的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Low cost vs. high-end eye tracking for usability testing
Accuracy of an open source remote eye tracking system and a state-of-the-art commercial eye tracker was measured 4 times during a usability test. Results from 9 participants showed both devices to be fairly stable over time, but the commercial tracker was more accurate with a mean error of 31 pixels against 59 pixels using the low cost system. This suggests that low cost eye tracking can become a viable alternative, when usability studies need not to distinguish between, for instance, particular words or menu items that participants are looking at, but only between larger areas-of-interest they pay attention to.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The future of natural user interfaces Session details: Sustainability 1 Places in spaces: common ground in virtual worlds Bridging the gap: implementing interaction through multi-user design Frictional widgets: enhancing touch interfaces with programmable friction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1