Although in real life people frequently perform visual search together, in lab experiments this social dimension is typically left out. Here, we investigate individual, collaborative and competitive visual search with visualization of search partners' gaze. Participants were instructed to search a grid of Gabor patches while being eye tracked. For collaboration and competition, searchers were shown in real time at which element the paired searcher was looking. To promote collaboration or competition, points were rewarded or deducted for correct or incorrect answers. Early in collaboration trials, searchers rarely fixated the same elements. Reaction times of couples were roughly halved compared with individual search, although error rates did not increase. This indicates searchers formed an efficient collaboration strategy. Overlap, the proportion of dwells that landed on hexagons that the other searcher had already looked at, was lower than expected from simulated overlap of two searchers who are blind to the behavior of their partner. The proportion of overlapping dwells correlated positively with ratings of the quality of collaboration. During competition, overlap increased earlier in time, indicating that competitors divided space less efficiently. Analysis of the entropy of the dwell locations and scan paths revealed that in the competition condition, a less fixed looking pattern was exhibited than in the collaborate and individual search conditions. We conclude that participants can efficiently search together when provided only with information about their partner's gaze position by dividing up the search space. Competing search exhibited more random gaze patterns, potentially reflecting increased interaction between searchers in this condition.

Department of Psychology Lund University Lund Sweden

Department of Psychology Regensburg University Regensburg Germany

Department of Psychology Torun University Toruń Poland

Experimental Psychology Helmholtz Institute Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands

Faculty of Arts Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

Lund University Humanities Lab Lund University Box 201 SE 221 00 Lund Sweden

Scene Grammar Lab Department of Cognitive Psychology Goethe University Frankfurt Frankfurt Germany

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Allsop J, Gray R. Flying under pressure: Effects of anxiety on attention and gaze behavior in aviation. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 2014;3(2):63–71.

Brainard DH. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision. 1997;10:433–436. PubMed

Brennan SE, Chen X, Dickinson CA, Neider MB, Zelinsky GJ. Coordinating cognition: The costs and benefits of shared gaze during collaborative search. Cognition. 2008;106(3):1465–1477. PubMed

Campbell-Meiklejohn DK, Bach DR, Roepstorff A, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. How the opinion of others affects our valuation of objects. Current Biology. 2010;20(13):1165–1170. PubMed PMC

Cascio CN, Scholz C, Falk EB. Social influence and the brain: Persuasion, susceptibility to influence and retransmission. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences. 2015;3(Suppl. C):51–57.

Cole GG, Skarratt PA, Kuhn G. Real person interaction in visual attention research. European Psychologist. 2016;21(2):141–149.

Dolk T, Hommel B, Prinz W, Liepelt R. The (not so) social Simon effect: A referential coding account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2013;39(5):1248–1260. PubMed

Eisenhardt KM, Brown SL. Competing on the edge: Strategy as structured chaos. Long Range Planning. 1998;31(5):786–789.

Ellis SR, Stark L. Statistical dependency in visual scanning. Human Factors. 1986;28(4):421–438. PubMed

Firestone CZ, Warren WH. Why does the rabbit escape the fox on a zig-zag path? Predator-prey dynamics and the constant bearing strategy. Journal of Vision. 2010;10(7):1049–1049.

Foulsham T, Lock M. How the eyes tell lies: Social gaze during a preference task. Cognitive Science. 2015;39(7):1704–1726. PubMed

Grissom, R. J., & Kim, J. J. (2012). Effect sizes for research: Univariate and multivariate applications (2 ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Hessels RS, Cornelissen THW, Kemner C, Hooge ITC. Qualitative tests of remote eyetracker recovery and performance during head rotation. Behavior Research Methods. 2015;47(3):848–859. PubMed

Hessels, R. S., Kemner, C., van den Boomen, C., & Hooge, I. T. C. (2016a). The area-of-interest problem in eyetracking research: A noise-robust solution for face and sparse stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, 48(4), 1694–1712. doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0676-y PubMed PMC

Hessels, R. S., Niehorster, D. C., Kemner, C., & Hooge, I. T. C. (2016b). Noise-robust fixation detection in eye movement data: Identification by two-means clustering (I2MC). Behavior Research Methods. doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0822-1 PubMed PMC

Holmqvist K, Andersson R. Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods, paradigms and measures. Lund, Sweden: Lund Eye-Tracking Research Institute; 2017.

Hooge, I. T. C., & Camps, G. (2013). Scan path entropy and arrow plots: Capturing scanning behavior of multiple observers. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(996). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00996 PubMed PMC

Hooge ITC, Erkelens CJ. Control of fixation duration in a simple search task. Perception & Psychophysics. 1996;58(7):969–976. PubMed

Hooge ITC, Erkelens CJ. Adjustment of fixation duration in visual search. Vision Research. 1998;38(9):IN1295–IN1294. PubMed

Hooge ITC, Erkelens CJ. Peripheral vision and oculomotor control during visual search. Vision Research. 1999;39(8):1567–1575. PubMed

Ingen Schenau, G. J. V., & Cavanagh, P. R. (1990). Power equations in endurance sports. Journal of Biomechanics, 23(9), 865–881. doi:10.1016/0021-9290(90)90352-4 PubMed

Jarodzka H, Balslev T, Holmqvist K, Nyström M, Scheiter K, Gerjets P, Eika B. Conveying clinical reasoning based on visual observation via eye-movement modelling examples. Instructional Science. 2012;40(5):813–827.

Jarodzka H, Holmqvist K, Gruber H. Eye tracking in educational science: Theoretical frameworks and research agendas. Journal of Eye Movement Research. 2017;10(1):1–18. PubMed PMC

Jarodzka H, van Gog T, Dorr M, Scheiter K, Gerjets P. Learning to see: Guiding students’ attention via a model’s eye movements fosters learning. Learning and Instruction. 2013;25(Suppl. C):62–70.

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(863). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863 PubMed PMC

Litchfield D, Ball LJ. Using another’s gaze as an explicit aid to insight problem solving. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2011;64(4):649–656. PubMed

Messmer, N., Leggett, N., Prince, M., & McCarley, J. S. (2017). Gaze linking in visual search: A help or a hindrance? Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting.

Müller R, Helmert JR, Pannasch S, Velichkovsky BM. Gaze transfer in remote cooperation: Is it always helpful to see what your partner is attending to? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2013;66(7):1302–1316. PubMed

Neider MB, Chen X, Dickinson CA, Brennan SE, Zelinsky GJ. Coordinating spatial referencing using shared gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2010;17(5):718–724. PubMed

Niehorster, D. C., Cornelissen, T. H. W., Holmqvist, K., Hooge, I. T. C., & Hessels, R. S. (2017). What to expect from your remote eye-tracker when participants are unrestrained. Behavior Research Methods, 1–15. doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0863-0 PubMed PMC

Nyström, M., Niehorster, D. C., Cornelissen, T., & Garde, H. (2016). Real-time sharing of gaze data between multiple eye trackers—Evaluation, tools, and advice. Behavior Research Methods. doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0806-1 PubMed PMC

Oliva, M., Niehorster, D. C., Jarodzka, H., & Holmqvist, K. (2017). Influence of coactors on saccadic and manual responses. i-Perception, 8(1). doi:10.1177/2041669517692814 PubMed PMC

Orquin JL, Ashby NJS, Clarke ADF. Areas of interest as a signal detection problem in behavioral eye-tracking research. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2016;29(2/3):103–115.

Orquin, J. L., & Holmqvist, K. (2017). Threats to the validity of eye-movement research in psychology. Behavior Research Methods. doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0998-z PubMed

Over EAB, Hooge ITC, Vlaskamp BNS, Erkelens CJ. Coarse-to-fine eye movement strategy in visual search. Vision Research. 2007;47(17):2272–2280. PubMed

Pelli DG. The Videotoolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision. 1997;10:437–442. PubMed

Pickering MJ, Garrod S. The interactive-alignment model: Developments and refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2004;27(2):212–225. PubMed

Skarratt, P., Cole, G. G., & Kuhn, G. (2012). Visual cognition during real social interaction. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(196). doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00196 PubMed PMC

Toussaint HM, Beek PJ. Biomechanics of competitive front crawl swimming. Sports Medicine. 1992;13(1):8–24. PubMed

van Wermeskerken, M., Litchfield, D., & van Gog, T. (2017). What am I looking at? Interpreting dynamic and static gaze displays. Cognitive Science, 1–33. doi:10.1111/cogs.12484 PubMed PMC

Velichkovsky BM. Communicating attention: Gaze position transfer in cooperative problem solving. Pragmatics & Cognition. 1995;3(2):199–223.

Weldon MS, Bellinger KD. Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1997;23(5):1160–1175. PubMed

Welsh TN, Elliott D, Anson JG, Dhillon V, Weeks DJ, Lyons JL, Chua R. Does Joe influence Fred’s action?: Inhibition of return across different nervous systems. Neuroscience Letters. 2005;385(2):99–104. PubMed

Yamani Y, Neider MB, Kramer AF, McCarley JS. Characterizing the efficiency of collaborative visual search with systems factorial technology. Archives of Scientific Psychology. 2017;5(1):1–9.

Zelinsky GJ, Rao RPN, Hayhoe MM, Ballard DH. Eye movements reveal the spatiotemporal dynamics of visual search. Psychological Science. 1997;8(6):448–453.

Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline