Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 395

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What can saliency models predict about eye movements? Spatial and sequential aspects of fixations during encoding and recognition

Open access
Foulsham, Tom, Underwood, Geoffrey·2008·Journal of Vision

Abstract

Saliency map models account for a small but significant amount of the variance in where people fixate, but evaluating these models with natural stimuli has led to mixed results. In the present study, the eye movements of participants were recorded while they viewed color photographs of natural scenes in preparation for a memory test (encoding) and when recognizing them later. These eye movements were then compared to the predictions of a well defined saliency map model (L. Itti & C. Koch, 2000), in terms of both individual fixation locations and fixation sequences (scanpaths). The saliency model is a significantly better predictor of fixation location than random models that take into account bias toward central fixations, and this is the case at both encoding and recognition. However, similarity between scanpaths made at multiple viewings of the same stimulus suggests that repetitive scanpaths also contribute to where people look. Top-down recapitulation of scanpaths is a key prediction of scanpath theory (D. Noton & L. Stark, 1971), but it might also be explained by bottom-up guidance. The present data suggest that saliency cannot account for scanpaths and that incorporating these sequences could improve model predictions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/8.2.6

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Foulsham, T., & Underwood, G.
Venue
Journal of Vision
Published
2008-02-20
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
6
ISSN
1534-7362 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117242469
Cited by
395
References
2
FWCI
43.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.