scholarly journals Safe and sensible preprocessing and baseline correction of pupil-size data

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiaan Mathôt ◽  
Jasper Fabius ◽  
Elle Van Heusden ◽  
Stefan Van der Stigchel
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiaan Mathôt ◽  
Jasper Fabius ◽  
Elle van Heusden ◽  
Stefan Van der Stigchel

Measurement of pupil size (pupillometry) has recently gained renewed interest from psychologists, but there is little agreement on how pupil-size data is best analyzed. Here we focus on one aspect of pupillometric analyses: baseline correction, that is, analyzing changes in pupil size relative to a baseline period. Baseline correction is useful in experiments that investigate the effect of some experimental manipulation on pupil size. In such experiments, baseline correction improves statistical power by taking into account random fluctuations in pupil size over time. However, we show that baseline correction can also distort data if unrealistically small pupil sizes are recorded during the baseline period, which can easily occur due to eye blinks, data loss, or other distortions. Divisive baseline correction (corrected pupil size = pupil size / baseline) is affected more strongly by such distortions than subtractive baseline correction (corrected pupil size = pupil size - baseline). We make four recommendations for safe and sensible baseline correction of pupil-size data: 1) use subtractive baseline correction; 2) visually compare your corrected and uncorrected data; 3) be wary of pupil-size effects that emerge faster than the latency of the pupillary response allows (within ±220 ms after the manipulation that induces the effect); and 4) remove trials on which baseline pupil size is unrealistically small (indicative of blinks and other distortions).


Author(s):  
Sebastiaan Mathôt ◽  
Jasper Fabius ◽  
Elle van Heusden ◽  
Stefan Van der Stigchel

Measurement of pupil size (pupillometry) has recently gained renewed interest from psychologists, but there is little agreement on how pupil-size data is best analyzed. Here we focus on one aspect of pupillometric analyses: baseline correction, that is, analyzing changes in pupil size relative to a baseline period. Baseline correction is useful in experiments that investigate the effect of some experimental manipulation on pupil size. In such experiments, baseline correction improves statistical power by taking into account random fluctuations in pupil size over time. However, we show that baseline correction can also distort data if unrealistically small pupil sizes are recorded during the baseline period, which can easily occur due to eye blinks, data loss, or other distortions. Divisive baseline correction (corrected pupil size = pupil size / baseline) is affected more strongly by such distortions than subtractive baseline correction (corrected pupil size = pupil size - baseline). We make four recommendations for safe and sensible baseline correction of pupil-size data: 1) use subtractive baseline correction; 2) visually compare your corrected and uncorrected data; 3) be wary of pupil-size effects that emerge faster than the latency of the pupillary response allows (within ±220 ms after the manipulation that induces the effect); and 4) remove trials on which baseline pupil size is unrealistically small (indicative of blinks and other distortions).


Author(s):  
Joseph Coyne ◽  
Ciara Sibley

Eye tracking technologies are being utilized at increasing rates within industry and research due to the very recent availability of low cost systems. This paper presents results from a study assessing two eye tracking systems, Gazepoint GP3 and Eye Tribe, both of which are available for under $500 and provide streaming gaze and pupil size data. The emphasis of this research was in evaluating the ability of these eye trackers to identify changes in pupil size which occur as a function of variations in lighting conditions as well as those associated with workload. Ten volunteers participated in an experiment in which a digit span task was employed to manipulate workload as user’s fixated on a monitor which varied in background luminance (black, gray and white). Results revealed that both systems were able to significantly differentiate pupil size differences in high and low workload trials and changes due to the monitor’s luminance. These findings are exceedingly promising for human factors researchers, as they open up the opportunity to augment studies with non-obtrusive, streaming measures of mental workload with technologies available for as little as $100.


2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 2232-2255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Geller ◽  
Matthew B. Winn ◽  
Tristian Mahr ◽  
Daniel Mirman
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 1336-1342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariska E. Kret ◽  
Elio E. Sjak-Shie
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Geller ◽  
Daniel Mirman ◽  
Tristan Mahr ◽  
Matthew Winn
Keyword(s):  

Accepted version to appear in BRM.


Author(s):  
David Weibel ◽  
Daniel Stricker ◽  
Bartholomäus Wissmath ◽  
Fred W. Mast

Like in the real world, the first impression a person leaves in a computer-mediated environment depends on his or her online appearance. The present study manipulates an avatar’s pupil size, eyeblink frequency, and the viewing angle to investigate whether nonverbal visual characteristics are responsible for the impression made. We assessed how participants (N = 56) evaluate these avatars in terms of different attributes. The findings show that avatars with large pupils and slow eye blink frequency are perceived as more sociable and more attractive. Compared to avatars seen in full frontal view or from above, avatars seen from below were rated as most sociable, self-confident, and attractive. Moreover, avatars’ pupil size and eyeblink frequency escape the viewer’s conscious perception but still influence how people evaluate them. The findings have wide-ranging applied implications for avatar design.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document