Watching You Watch Movies: Using Eye Tracking to Inform Cognitive Film Theory

2013 ◽  
pp. 165-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim J. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Leonardo ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 421-427
Author(s):  
Colin Williamson

This article explores the topic of scientific discovery in two cases of intersections between imaging technologies and sleight-of-hand magic in the domain of nontheatrical film and media. The first case is the French psychologist Alfred Binet’s use of chronophotography to study magicians in the 1890s. The second is the reanimation of Binet’s study by cognitive (neuro)scientists beginning in the early 2000s using eye-tracking cameras and other digital-imaging devices. The author focuses on how both cases treat the magician as a medium of discovery and how both use optical devices to “see” visual processes related to the experience of wonder.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-150
Author(s):  
Giorgos Dimitriadis

Abstract The use of eye-tracking in data collection, when accompanied by the proper research questions and methodology, is a powerful tool that may provide invaluable insights into the way viewers perceive and experience movies. Film theory can use eye-tracking to test and verify research hypotheses not only with unprecedented accuracy, but also with the ability to address a significant variety of theoretical questions. Eye-tracking can help build contemporary film theory by supporting its various fields of research, and also even assist the production of films themselves by helping filmmakers make more informed creative decisions. The present article is an overview of eye-tracking and its gradual implementation in cinema research; in the context of discussing some recent examples of academic work based on eye-tracking, it considers the technology of eye-trackers and the way in which human vision handles visual information on screen. By testing the attentional behaviour of viewers, eye-tracking can produce more solid answers to questions regarding the way films are experienced; therefore, it may very well prove to be the spearhead of a more robust body of film theory in the near future.


2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 2245-2254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianrong Wang ◽  
Yumeng Zhu ◽  
Yu Chen ◽  
Abdilbar Mamat ◽  
Mei Yu ◽  
...  

Purpose The primary purpose of this study was to explore the audiovisual speech perception strategies.80.23.47 adopted by normal-hearing and deaf people in processing familiar and unfamiliar languages. Our primary hypothesis was that they would adopt different perception strategies due to different sensory experiences at an early age, limitations of the physical device, and the developmental gap of language, and others. Method Thirty normal-hearing adults and 33 prelingually deaf adults participated in the study. They were asked to perform judgment and listening tasks while watching videos of a Uygur–Mandarin bilingual speaker in a familiar language (Standard Chinese) or an unfamiliar language (Modern Uygur) while their eye movements were recorded by eye-tracking technology. Results Task had a slight influence on the distribution of selective attention, whereas subject and language had significant influences. To be specific, the normal-hearing and the d10eaf participants mainly gazed at the speaker's eyes and mouth, respectively, in the experiment; moreover, while the normal-hearing participants had to stare longer at the speaker's mouth when they confronted with the unfamiliar language Modern Uygur, the deaf participant did not change their attention allocation pattern when perceiving the two languages. Conclusions Normal-hearing and deaf adults adopt different audiovisual speech perception strategies: Normal-hearing adults mainly look at the eyes, and deaf adults mainly look at the mouth. Additionally, language and task can also modulate the speech perception strategy.


Author(s):  
Pirita Pyykkönen ◽  
Juhani Järvikivi

A visual world eye-tracking study investigated the activation and persistence of implicit causality information in spoken language comprehension. We showed that people infer the implicit causality of verbs as soon as they encounter such verbs in discourse, as is predicted by proponents of the immediate focusing account ( Greene & McKoon, 1995 ; Koornneef & Van Berkum, 2006 ; Van Berkum, Koornneef, Otten, & Nieuwland, 2007 ). Interestingly, we observed activation of implicit causality information even before people encountered the causal conjunction. However, while implicit causality information was persistent as the discourse unfolded, it did not have a privileged role as a focusing cue immediately at the ambiguous pronoun when people were resolving its antecedent. Instead, our study indicated that implicit causality does not affect all referents to the same extent, rather it interacts with other cues in the discourse, especially when one of the referents is already prominently in focus.


Author(s):  
Paul A. Wetzel ◽  
Gretchen Krueger-Anderson ◽  
Christine Poprik ◽  
Peter Bascom

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document