When the picture appears…
Eye movements were recorded as participants viewed the portrait, using an SR Research EyeLink 2 eye tracker set to record gaze position at 500 Hz using only the pupil detection method. Calibration and validation of the eye tracker involved a randomly permuted display of nine circular targets on the monitor. If the validation indicated an average error in excess of 0.5° or a maximum error in excess of 1°, the calibration and validation procedures were repeated.
Fixations and saccades were classified using the software supplied by SR Research. This detects saccades when eye position changes by more than 0.1°, with a minimum velocity of 30° s −1 and a minimum acceleration of 8000° s −2 , over a period of at least 4 ms. No minimum fixation duration or saccade amplitude thresholds were applied. Note that data from two participants were lost, one due to a technical error as the data were being saved, the other due to clear vertical slippage of the eye tracker during the recording session.
Studies of face viewing, including Yarbus's own work, typically involve the presentation of isolated faces, devoid of the context of the subject's body (eg Bindemann et al 2009 ; Butler et al 2005 ; Guo et al 2010 ). Yarbus's report of cyclic looking around the eyes and mouth of the face to produce the triangular eye movement records seen in figure 4 has become a widely accepted tenet in face research. However, it is less certain whether such cyclic viewing of the facial features is seen when the face is viewed in the context of the subject's body.
In Yarbus's consideration of face scanning there was no instruction to the viewer before they were presented with the face. We therefore use only data from the free viewing condition in the present analysis. By combining the data from all participants while they viewed the portrait of Yarbus with no explicit instructions (the ‘free viewing’ condition), we can consider whether there were general tendencies to fixate on particular parts of the face.
In order to consider whether there was an overall tendency to look more at the eyes and mouth of the face than other parts of the face, we constructed an overall distribution of the allocation of gaze to the portrait. This distribution was constructed by iteratively adding a Gaussian centred around each sample from the eye tracker (each sample being separated by 2 ms). Each Gaussian had full width at half maximum of 0.5° to reflect estimates of foveal extent. The resulting 3-dimensional landscape contains peaks, the heights of which reflect the cumulative viewing time across all participants. For ease of interpretation, this distribution is presented as a ‘heat map’ overlaid upon the portrait of Yarbus ( figure 6 ). Only the region around the face is shown in this figure to make comparisons to Yarbus's studies of isolated face viewing ( figure 4 ) easier. There is a strong tendency to look at one of the eyes and the mouth of the face in the portrait. The other eye (Yarbus's right eye), which is in relative shadow on the face, received only a small fraction of the overall allocation of gaze time.
Overall fixation distribution of people free viewing the portrait of Yarbus. The intensity of the coloured overlay indicates the amount of fixation time received across all observers.
While the plot in figure 6 shows an overall tendency to look at the mouth and one of the eyes, it does not allow us to consider whether participants employed the cyclic viewing behaviour reported by Yarbus. For this we must look at the sequences of eye movements made by individual observers. In our dataset we found that the scan patterns over the face in the portrait varied considerably. Four representative plots are shown in figure 7 . In some cases, scan patterns resembling those found by Yarbus can be seen (the right hand panels of figure 7 ). Here we see portions of the scan patterns that involved looks between the key features of the face. Thus, there was some cyclic looking behaviour evident in these trials. However, in many cases (for example, the plots in the left-hand panels of figure 7 ) no such cyclic patterns of looking around the features were present. In these cases the typical scanning behaviour described by Yarbus was absent. It should be noted that all of the plots in figure 7 include a large number of scans to locations outside the sections of the portrait shown in the plots—these are looks to other parts of the portrait such as the body. We will return to the issue of looks at non-face regions of the portrait in the next section of this paper.
Scan patterns for four of the observers in the present study as they freely viewed the portrait of Yarbus. As in figure 6 , for comparisons to Yarbus's work on face viewing (figure 4), only the facial region of the portrait is shown here.
The individual differences in scan patterns over the facial region of the portrait are consistent with Yarbus's study of individual differences in viewing a complex scene ( The Unexpected Visitor ). In figure 108 of the final chapter of Eye Movements and Vision , Yarbus plotted the eye movement behaviour for seven different observers, each viewing The Unexpected Visitor for 3 min under free-viewing instructions. We further consider individual differences suggested in figure 7 of the present study by looking at differences across the entire spatial extent of the portrait. Figure 8 shows eye movement data for seven randomly selected participants viewing the portrait of Yarbus. Yarbus's corresponding figure of seven participants looking at the Unexpected Visitor is shown alongside these data for comparison. In both sets of data participants viewed the picture with no instructions other than to simply look at the image. In Yarbus's data, participants viewed the painting for 3 min. In our data each participant viewed the image for 50 s. Yarbus noted that there were global similarities in the patterns of eye movements made by the different subjects when viewing the painting but that there were also clear differences between these observers. In our data the same general observations can be made. However, in some cases (compare panels 1 and 2 in figure 8b ) the differences between participants appear quite considerable.
Seven participants freely viewing pictures. (a) Yarbus's data originally published in figure 107 of Eye Movements and Vision (with kind permission from Springer Science and Business Media). (b) Data from seven randomly selected participants in the present study.
The issue of how a high-level task, such as the instruction given prior to viewing a scene, influences eye movement behaviour has become a question of central interest in eye movement research. The debate about the extent to which fixations are allocated on the basis of internally generated priorities has generated a large volume of research. For an overview of the current state of the continuing debate about the relative contributions of low- and high-level factors in targeting eye movements during scene viewing, we refer the reader to the recent special issue of Visual Cognition on this topic (Tatler 2009 ) and to Land and Tatler ( 2009 ). However, the literature concerned with the relative roles of low- and high-level factors in scene viewing rarely engages with that on face viewing. Indeed, the stimuli employed in scene perception studies are often devoid of faces, comprising natural but unpopulated scenes. Conversely the stimuli employed in face research are often devoid of scenes (or indeed anything other than the face). Yarbus's study of The Unexpected Visitor is a rare example of a scene stimulus that contains human faces, but like other scene perception studies that have included faces (eg Birmingham et al 2009 ; Torralba et al 2006 ), these faces are too small to discern the detailed manner in which the facial features are scanned and whether this scanning is sensitive to viewing instructions. Our study allows us to consider whether face scanning is sensitive to viewing instruction, but for a stimulus in which the face is not the only component of the image.
Figure 9 shows the distributions of fixations on the face region of the portrait for all seven instruction conditions. The plots are constructed in the same way as was done for figure 6 above. Note that there are clear global differences between the seven instructions. Most notably, tasks 4 (what had the person been doing?) and 5 (remember the clothes) resulted in a lower proportion of looks to the face region being directed to the eyes.
Fixation distributions on the face of the portrait for each of the seven instruction conditions. Note that the scaling for the colours varies between plots, with the bars to the right-hand side of each plot showing the viewing times denoted by the intensities of the colours. Viewing times shown in the bars to the right of each plot are in milliseconds and are cumulative across all participants.
From figure 9 it is also clear (as shown in the bars to the right-hand side of each plot) that the amount of time spent looking at the faces varies considerably between tasks. The data suggest that less time was spent looking at the face for tasks 5 (remember the clothes) and 6 (remember everything) than the other tasks. To consider this in more detail, we now turn to the question of the manner in which the entire portrait was viewed. To address this—and for comparison with Yarbus's original data—we first show eye movement records for a single randomly selected participant from the present study, viewing the portrait of Yarbus with seven different instructions ( figure 10 ). As can be seen in both the original data collected by Yarbus and in our own data, the instructions given to the participant had a clear influence on the overall inspection behaviour of this observer during repeated viewings of Yarbus's portrait. It is interesting to note the similarities between the patterns of eye movements made under the seven instruction conditions between our data and those collected by Yarbus. For example, when asked to estimate age(s) of people (instruction 3), observers restricted their eye movements almost exclusively to facial and nearby regions. When asked to remember as much as possible about everything in the image (instruction 6), eye movements explored the full extent of the picture.
One participant viewing the same image seven times, each with a different set of instructions. (a) Yarbus's original data (from figure 109 in Eye Movements and Vision ). (b) Data from the present study. Eye movements from the full 50 s viewing period are shown for each condition. (1) Free examination of the picture. (2) Estimate the material circumstances of the person. (3) Give the age of the person in the picture. (4) Estimate what the person had been doing immediately before the photograph was taken. (5) Remember the clothes worn by the person. (6) Remember the positions and details of everything in the picture. (7) Estimate how long the person had been away from home.
The data in figures 9 and and10 10 both point to differences in the allocation of gaze across the seven instruction conditions. However, it is important to consider whether these results generalise across participants or are parochial to the selected observer. For The Unexpected Visitor , the question of generalisability of Yarbus's results has been addressed by DeAngelus and Pelz ( 2009 ); these authors showed that the same inter-instruction differences can be found in a group of observers. For our data, we address this question by considering gaze allocation across all participants in the present study. Figure 11 shows the distribution of viewing time combined for all participants across the entire portrait for each instruction condition. These distributions highlight clear differences in gaze allocation among instruction conditions and confirm that the differences found in the single participant plotted in figure 10 generalise across a group of participants.
Gaze distributions for each of the seven instruction conditions. Data are accumulated over all participants. The bars to the right of each plot show the gaze time (in ms) that is indicated by each colour.
Figure 11 clearly shows that there were differences in the spatial allocation of attention to the portrait when viewing it under the seven different instructions. In order to explore these spatial differences quantitatively, we divided the image into nine regions of interest ( figure 12 ) and considered how long was spent fixating on each of these regions of interest.
Regions of interest.
When considering the allocation of fixations across the nine regions of interest, we can consider the proportion of fixation time in each of the regions ( figure 13a ). However, the regions of interest vary considerably in their relative sizes ( figure 12 ). We therefore normalised the proportion of viewing time by the area of each region of interest in the following analysis. A two-way ANOVA [instruction condition (7 levels) x region of interest (9 levels)] revealed a main effect of the region of interest, F (8, 136) = 105.07, p < 0.001, partial η 2 = 0.861. Because fixation times are reported as a (normalised) proportion of the viewing period, there was no main effect of instruction condition. However, there was an interaction between instruction condition and region of interest, F (48, 816) = 3.22, p < 0.001, partial η 2 = 0.159 ( figure 13b ).
(a) Proportion of viewing time in each ROI for each of the seven instruction conditions. (b) Normalised viewing time in each ROI for each of the seven instruction conditions. Regions of interest: 1 = hat, 2 = eyes, 3 = nose, 4 = mouth, 5 = rest of face, 6 = arms, 7 = buttons, 8 = rest of torso, 9 = background.
In general, across all conditions, apart perhaps from when asked to remember the clothes worn, people looked more to Yarbus's facial regions than to other regions of the portrait. Whether normalised or not, viewing time was very low on the arms, buttons, and background of the portrait ( figure 13 ). The torso was looked at quite a lot ( figure 13a ); however, the torso occupied a large proportion of the image and so would be expected to receive a reasonable amount of viewing time whether or not it was of particular interest to the viewer. Normalising viewing time on the torso by the area of this region showed that it received a small relative fraction of the fixation time ( figure 13b ).
These data extend Yarbus's original findings concerning the influence of instructions on subsequent viewing behaviour. Here we show that, for a much simpler scene in which only one individual is present, the allocation of gaze changes depending on the instructions given prior to viewing. Moreover, we have shown that the manner in which a face is inspected depends on the instructions given. That is, the typical tendency to view the eyes and mouth, and to cycle between features, is not universal and can be diminished or absent depending on the viewer's task. Since faces are rarely seen in isolation under normal viewing conditions, some caution may be necessary in extending the interpretations from photographed faces to natural behaviour.
The rather brief final chapter of Yarbus's Eye Movements and Vision has made a profound contribution to the subsequent literature on eye movement control during complex-scene perception. The legacy has been twofold: concerning how people look at faces and how cognitive factors such as instructions given prior to viewing can influence inspection behaviour.
In many respects it is the latter of these two contributions that Yarbus's book has become most well known for. Interestingly, Buswell ( 1935 ) had already shown that instructions influenced fixation behaviour. But Yarbus's visualisations of such clear differences in each of his seven records of a single observer viewing a single scene have remained an emblematic illustration of this point. The question of to what extent cognitive factors influence where observers look in complex scenes rose to the forefront of eye movement research in the early 1990s. Yarbus's prominence in this era coincided with a number of distinguished researchers beginning to emphasise the importance of cognitive factors on eye movement control. Two influential publications at the start of the 1990s placed cognitive factors firmly at the forefront of eye movement research: Eileen Kowler's ( 1990 ) chapter on cognitive influences on gaze and Keith Rayner's ( 1992 ) edited volume on Eye Movements and Visual Cognition . Three papers in the latter discuss the importance of Yarbus's work on cognitive control of fixation selection (Carroll et al 1992 ; Henderson 1992 ; Klein et al 1992 ). The 1990s also saw the emergence of the Active Vision approach to eye movements (Ballard 1991 ; Ballard et al 1992 ; Findlay and Gilchrist 2003 ), and it is at this time that Dana Ballard, Mary Hayhoe, and Mike Land all began to study eye movements in the context of natural behaviour. All of these authors have emphasised the importance of Yarbus's work as a demonstration that where we look depends critically on our cognitive task. Yarbus's work has since become established as a popular, elegant demonstration of high-level influences on gaze control. The question of whether and to what extent low- and high-level factors have a role in selecting where humans direct their gaze when viewing complex scenes continues to be a prominent and controversial topic in eye movement research (see Land and Tatler 2009 ; Tatler 2009 ).
The prominence of Yarbus's work in the modern debate about eye guidance is evidenced by the total number and yearly frequency of citations that Eye Movements and Vision has received ( figure 14 ). A noticeable change in the popularity of this work is evident in the mid-1990s. Indeed, studies of eye movements in natural behaviour have been inspired heavily by his work. The notion of task-dependent patterns of fixations has driven and underpinned many of the studies of eye movements in the context of natural behaviour (Land and Lee 1994 ; Land and Tatler 2009 ).
Citations per year of the English edition(s) of Yarbus's book Eye Movements and Vision . At the time of this paper going to press, Yarbus's book had been cited 1612 times, including 47 so far in 2010. (Data collated using the ISI Web of Knowledge to search for citations of Yarbus's book in peer-reviewed journal articles.)
While the prominence of Yarbus's work within the contemporary study of eye movement control during scene perception is clear, it should be noted that the impact of the work is by no means restricted to this field of research. The widespread recognition of the importance of this elegant demonstration of cognitive control of inspection behaviour has had an influence in areas as diverse as neuroscience, artificial intelligence, computer science, and engineering. Indeed, the book has been cited in 501 different journals, covering a wide range of subject areas. Figure 15 summarises the frequency of citations of Eye Movements and Vision across the nine main disciplines in which the book is cited.
Citations of Eye Movements and Vision across main disciplines.
It is unusual for so little to be known about a visual scientist whose research is so well known. This applies to Yarbus, particularly amongst the English-speaking scientific community. We hope that we have attached a little more personal flesh to his sturdy scientific skeleton. His book on Eye Movements and Vision is cited with increasing frequency, and its attraction has shifted from the early chapters (relating to image stabilisation) to the later ones (concerning observation of complex scenes).
One area of study that has expanded enormously since 1967 is face perception. The characteristic pattern of eye movements when viewing pictures of faces was established by Yarbus. It has since been replicated many times and has become an accepted canon in face research. We extend this influential finding by considering face scanning when more than the face alone is presented to the viewer. Here we found that while facial features, particularly the eyes and mouth, still receive the greatest fraction of gaze allocation, the cyclic scanning between eyes and mouth reported by Yarbus was less evident when the face is viewed in the context of a body and cannot be seen in all observers.
The effect of instructions on inspecting complex scenes, demonstrated in Yarbus's recordings of a single observer viewing the painting The Unexpected Visitor seven times, each time with different instructions prior to viewing, has inspired and underpinned a wealth of eye-tracking studies since the 1990s. DeAngelus and Pelz ( 2009 ) recently returned to Yarbus's study and were able to confirm that the findings described by Yarbus for a single viewer generalised to multiple viewers of The Unexpected Visitor . We extend Yarbus's work by considering the influence of instructions on viewing a portrait. This allows us not only to consider whether Yarbus's findings generalise to a more simple visual stimulus but also the influence of instructions on face viewing. We find similar sensitivity to task instructions for viewing a portrait as was originally reported in Eye movements and Vision . Moreover, the extent to which particular features (and indeed the whole face) are looked at depends on the instructions given prior to viewing.
Yarbus was far seeing in his analysis of vision. In addition to the then contemporary issues he addressed on image stabilisation, his more exploratory experiments on viewing complex scenes strike a chord with those extending the study of eye movements beyond the confines of the laboratory.
We would like to express our thanks to the following people who have kindly helped us with biographical material concerning Yarbus: Horace Barlow, Bogdan Dreher, Mary Hayhoe, Fedor Jagla, Eileen Kowler, Mike Land, Alexander Logvinenko, Victoria Moiseeva, Galina Paramei, Galina Rozhkova, Michael S. Smirnov, and Gerald Westheimer. The preparation of this paper was in part supported by grants from the European Commission (NEST-Pathfinder projects PERCEPT 043261) and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (under Interdisciplinary oriented basic research programme, 09-06-12003). We would also like to thank the two anonymous reviewers who provided extremely helpful comments on the earlier version of this manuscript.
(1) The original Russian title of this painting has also been translated as They Did Not Expect Him.
Benjamin W Tatler, School of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK; e-mail: [email protected] .
Nicholas J Wade, School of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK; e-mail: [email protected] .
Hoi Kwan, School of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK; e-mail: [email protected] .
John M Findlay, Department of Psychology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK; e-mail: [email protected] .
Boris M Velichkovsky, Institute of Cognitive Studies, Kurchatov Research Centre, 123182 Moscow, Russia; e-mail: gro.noitingoc-deilppa@hcilev .
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
4627 Accesses
2470 Citations
22 Altmetric
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Subscribe and save.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Licence this eBook for your library
Institutional subscriptions
Front matter, introduction.
Alfred L. Yarbus
Eye movements during fixation on stationary objects, saccadic eye movements, eye movements during change of stationary points of fixation in space, eye movements during perception of moving objects, eye movements during perception of complex objects, back matter, authors and affiliations, bibliographic information.
Book Title : Eye Movements and Vision
Authors : Alfred L. Yarbus
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-5379-7
Publisher : Springer New York, NY
eBook Packages : Springer Book Archive
Copyright Information : Springer-Verlag US 1967
eBook ISBN : 978-1-4899-5379-7 Published: 11 November 2013
Edition Number : 1
Number of Pages : XIII, 222
Topics : Ophthalmology
Policies and ethics
Yarbus commenced his research on visual process in the late 1940s and continued for the rest of his career. In 1963 Yarbus integrated, analyzed, and systematized the results of all his investigations up to 1962 that were rather briefly presented in Biofizika and in a number of other Russian publications. (At that time all Russian journals had limitations on the number of pages per article). Performing this work, Yarbus created a manuscript that was almost simultaneously presented to the scientific society in the form of PhD Thesis (1964) and a book (1965).
Eye movements and vision consisted of seven chapters. The first and longest chapter was concerned with methods and this was followed by considerations of perception of retinal stationary objects (2), eye movements during fixation (3), saccades (4), scanning (5), pursuit (6), and eye movements with complex objects (7). Citations of the book rose sharply around 1969 and plateaued until the early 1990s, when they increased dramatically. The first phase was concerned with the methods and results from image stabilisation and the second with the growing interest in attentional effects of eye movements. In the context of the book, the attention shifted from chapters 1-3 to chapter 7, which addressed “The problem of eye movements during perception of pictures, during reading, during observation of optical illusions, and during comparison of distances”. The major impact of the book is now seen as the directed effects of scanning eye movements as a consequence of the instructions given: “Analysis of the eye-movement records shows that the elements attracting attention contain, in the observer’s opinion, may contain, information useful and essential for perception”.
The cornerstone of Yarbus’s research summarised in his monograph was the development of a method for accurately recording eye movements, using suction caps on the eyes. The caps developed by Yarbus allowed stable recordings of eye position over extended periods of investigation. Importantly, he developed devices that allowed images to be presented that moved with the eyes such that a stabilised retinal image could be presented. Wider recognition was to follow the translation of his book Eye movements and vision into English; it opened the eyes of many researchers to the originality of his methods and to the implications of his experiments.
Yarbus considered that his main contributions were the novel methods of image stabilisation: “This book deals with the perception of images which are strictly stationary relative to the retina, the principles governing human eye movements, and the study of their role in the process of vision”. Yarbus developed novel full-fitting contact lenses which were held in position by suction: “The most important element of the apparatus used in this method is the special suction device, hereafter referred to as a ‘cap’” (p. 29). Eight different suction caps were described, two of which are shown below.
Left, suction caps P1 and P2 used by Yarbus; centre, eye movement recording apparatus; right, If the cap fits by Nicholas Wade.
Purchase this article with an account.
Marianne Lipps , Jeff B. Pelz; Yarbus revisited: task-dependent oculomotor behavior. Journal of Vision 2004;4(8):115. https://doi.org/10.1167/4.8.115 .
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
The work of Alfred Yarbus (1967) is often cited in discussions of ‘bottom-up’ vs. ‘top-down’ oculomotor control strategies. Many authors use Yarbus' experiment in which subjects viewed Repin's painting of an “unexpected visitor” returning home after a long absence to demonstrate the task-dependence of eye movement patterns. Yarbus reported that subjects' eye movement records varied dramatically with instruction, depending, for example, on whether subjects were simply examining the painting or were preparing to answer a question such as “surmise what the family had been doing before the arrival of the ‘unexpected visitor.’” Yarbus eyetracking apparatus was primitive by today's standards, but more important were the conditions under which the experiments were performed. Extraordinarily long (e.g., three minute) viewing times, severely restricted movements, and awkward (and likely painful) optical stalks attached to the sclera via suction surely affected the oft-reported results. While there is no doubt that eye movement patterns are influenced by high-level tasks, it is not clear to what degree Yarbus' results reflect the peculiar circumstances of his study. Because of the role of Yarbus' work in the literature, it is important to determine the extent to which the results reflect oculomotor behavior under more natural conditions. Twenty subjects' gaze patterns were monitored with a head-free eyetracker as they viewed Repin's painting (and other images) on a large-field display. As with Yarbus' experiment, subjects either free-viewed the images or were asked one of a number of questions about each image. The presentations were self-paced; viewing times were typically an order of magnitude shorter than the times Yarbus imposed. While subjects' eye-movement patterns were clearly task dependent, the patterns are much less dramatic than those shown in Yarbus' now classic illustrations.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
Rik Pieters, Michel Wedel, Goal Control of Attention to Advertising: The Yarbus Implication, Journal of Consumer Research , Volume 34, Issue 2, August 2007, Pages 224–233, https://doi.org/10.1086/519150
An eye-tracking experiment with four processing goals and a free-viewing condition reveals goal control of attention even during a few seconds of self-paced ad exposure. An ad-memorization goal enhanced attention to the body text, pictorial, and brand design objects. A brand-learning goal enhanced attention to the body text but simultaneously inhibited attention to the pictorial design. This supports the thesis that ad informativeness is goal contingent. Differences in pupillary diameter between ad objects but not between processing goals reflect the pupil's role in maintaining optimal vision. Implications of the findings for advertising theory and avenues for future research are indicated.
Sign in with a library card.
Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:
Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.
Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.
If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.
Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.
Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:
Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:
If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.
A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.
Click the account icon in the top right to:
Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.
For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.
To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.
Don't already have a personal account? Register
Month: | Total Views: |
---|---|
December 2016 | 2 |
January 2017 | 2 |
February 2017 | 30 |
March 2017 | 18 |
April 2017 | 10 |
May 2017 | 9 |
June 2017 | 10 |
July 2017 | 11 |
August 2017 | 13 |
September 2017 | 31 |
October 2017 | 82 |
November 2017 | 63 |
December 2017 | 35 |
January 2018 | 33 |
February 2018 | 4 |
March 2018 | 27 |
April 2018 | 28 |
May 2018 | 23 |
June 2018 | 18 |
July 2018 | 20 |
August 2018 | 29 |
September 2018 | 39 |
October 2018 | 37 |
November 2018 | 47 |
December 2018 | 34 |
January 2019 | 40 |
February 2019 | 24 |
March 2019 | 33 |
April 2019 | 29 |
May 2019 | 33 |
June 2019 | 24 |
July 2019 | 27 |
August 2019 | 13 |
September 2019 | 18 |
October 2019 | 31 |
November 2019 | 53 |
December 2019 | 27 |
January 2020 | 24 |
February 2020 | 34 |
March 2020 | 41 |
April 2020 | 23 |
May 2020 | 16 |
June 2020 | 21 |
July 2020 | 22 |
August 2020 | 14 |
September 2020 | 36 |
October 2020 | 19 |
November 2020 | 37 |
December 2020 | 13 |
January 2021 | 15 |
February 2021 | 13 |
March 2021 | 16 |
April 2021 | 37 |
May 2021 | 29 |
June 2021 | 16 |
July 2021 | 26 |
August 2021 | 30 |
September 2021 | 9 |
October 2021 | 18 |
November 2021 | 45 |
December 2021 | 24 |
January 2022 | 16 |
February 2022 | 26 |
March 2022 | 33 |
April 2022 | 25 |
May 2022 | 29 |
June 2022 | 24 |
July 2022 | 10 |
August 2022 | 18 |
September 2022 | 16 |
October 2022 | 27 |
November 2022 | 31 |
December 2022 | 22 |
January 2023 | 23 |
February 2023 | 36 |
March 2023 | 34 |
April 2023 | 32 |
May 2023 | 13 |
June 2023 | 10 |
July 2023 | 15 |
August 2023 | 19 |
September 2023 | 13 |
October 2023 | 31 |
November 2023 | 24 |
December 2023 | 47 |
January 2024 | 45 |
February 2024 | 15 |
March 2024 | 32 |
April 2024 | 40 |
May 2024 | 25 |
June 2024 | 17 |
July 2024 | 15 |
August 2024 | 17 |
Citing articles via.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide
Sign In or Create an Account
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
We extended his experiment on the effect of instructions on viewing a picture using a portrait of Yarbus rather than a painting. The results obtained broadly supported those found by Yarbus. Keywords: eye movement, saccade, face perception, eye guidance, scene perception, Yarbus, stabilised retinal image, history
In the second experiment, we repeat and extend Yarbus's original experiment by collecting eye movements of 21 observers viewing 15 natural scenes (including Yarbus's scene) under Yarbus's seven questions.
Alfred Lukyanovich Yarbus (Альфред Лукьянович Ярбус; 3 April 1914 in Moscow - 1986) was a Soviet psychologist who studied eye movements in the 1950s and 1960s.
ct vs. 25% chance-level; binomial test, p = 1:0722e 04). In the second experiment, we repeat and extend Yarbus' original experiment by collecting eye movements of 21 observers viewing 15 natural scenes. (including Yarbus' scene) under Yarbus' seven questions. We show that task decoding is possible, also moderately but signi cantly above chance ...
In the second experiment, we repeat and extend Yarbus's original experiment by collecting eye movements of 21 observers viewing 15 natural scenes (including Yarbus's scene) under Yarbus's seven questions.
We extended his experiment on the effect of instructions on viewing a picture using a portrait of Yarbus rather than a painting. The results obtained broadly supported those found by Yarbus.
We extended his experiment on the effect of instructions on viewing a picture using a portrait of Yarbus rather than a painting. The results obtained broadly supported those found by Yarbus.
We replicated Yarbus' experiment using a head-free eyetracker with 17 naïve observers. The presentations were self-paced; viewing times were typically an order of magnitude shorter than the times Yarbus imposed.
Alfred Lukyanovich Yarbus (1914-1986) is best known for his pioneering experiments on vision with stabilized retinal images and also on how the eyes move over patterns. The experiments he conducted in the 1950s and early 1960s were described in his seminal book Eye Movements and Vision (Figure 1) which was published in Russian in 1965 and translated into English two years later.
Alfred Lukyanovich Yarbus (1914-1986) is best known for his research on eye movements as described in his seminal book Eye movements and vision. It was published in Russian in 1965 and translated into English two years later. Yarbus is a towering figure in European neuroscience because of his pioneering experiments with stabilised retinal ...
years earlier, as Yarbus himself has acknowledged, inlaboratories in America and England. Plastic contact lenses were used in those experiments. Poorly fitting lenses of this kind exhibit considerable slippage over the eyeball and hence may indeed be inferior to Yarbus' cap in experiments on eye movements and stabilized images, especially
Eye Movements During Change of Stationary Points of Fixation in Space Alfred L. Yarbus Pages 147-158 Download chapter PDF
The impact of Yarbus's research on eye movements was enormous following the translation of his book Eye Movements and Vision into English in 1967. In stark contrast, the published material in English concerning his life is scant. We provide a brief biography of Yarbus and assess his impact on contemporary approaches to research on eye movements. While early interest in his work focused on ...
The inversion technique should be applicable to complex natural scenes and abstract tasks such as those in the original Yarbus experiment. To this end, we propose to use Hidden-Markov-Models (HMMs) to relax the inherent assumptions in the simplistic salience models and use real-world eye movements to train task-dependent models that can infer ...
In the second experiment, we repeat and extend Yarbus's original experiment by collecting eye movements of 21 observers viewing 15 natural scenes (including Yarbus's scene) under Yarbus's seven questions.
The cornerstone of Yarbus's research summarised in his monograph was the development of a method for accurately recording eye movements, using suction caps on the eyes. The caps developed by Yarbus allowed stable recordings of eye position over extended periods of investigation. Importantly, he developed devices that allowed images to be ...
We replicated Yarbus' experiment using a head-free eye tracker with 17 naïve observers. The presentations were self-paced; viewing times were typically an order of magnitude shorter than the times Yarbus imposed.
Alfred Lukyanovich Yarbus (1914-1986) is best known for his pioneering experiments on vision with stabilized retinal images and also on how the eyes move over patterns. The experiments he conducted in the 1950s and early 1960s were described in his seminal book Eye Movements and Vision ( Figure 1) which was published in Russian in 1965 and translated into English two years later.
The work of Alfred Yarbus (1967) is often cited in discussions of 'bottom-up' vs. 'top-down' oculomotor control strategies. Many authors use Yarbus' experiment in which subjects viewed Repin's painting of an "unexpected visitor" returning home after a long absence to demonstrate the task-dependence of eye movement patterns.
Yarbus (1967) showed that eye movement patterns look different depending on task. We used pattern classification to see if task could be predicted from eye movements. Both classifiers and human observers failed to predict task from eye movements alone.
Abstract. An eye-tracking experiment with four processing goals and a free-viewing condition reveals goal control of attention even during a few seconds of
During this time, Yarbus only rarely performed the experiments having direct relation to the content of the planned book. Meanwhile, Yarbus's ideas came into great prominence in Russia.
Yarbus (Greene,Liu,Wolfe) - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. This study tested whether an observer's task when viewing images (e.g. memorizing details, estimating decade, assessing social relationships) could be predicted based on their eye movement patterns alone. Observers viewed images for 10 seconds under different task instructions while their ...