Inefficient Eye Movements

Gamification Improves Task Execution, But Not Fixation Strategy

Warren R. G. James, Josephine Reuther, Ellen Angus, Alasdair D. F. Clarke, Amelia R. Hunt (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Decisions about where to fixate are highly variable and often inefficient. In the current study, we investigated whether such decisions would improve with increased motivation. Participants had to detect a discrimination target, which would appear in one of two boxes, but only after they chose a location to fixate. The distance between boxes determines which location to fixate to maximise the probability of being able to see the target: participants should fixate between the two boxes when they are close together, and on one of the two boxes when they are far apart. We “gamified” this task, giving participants easy-to-track rewards that were contingent on discrimination accuracy. Their decisions and performance were compared to previous results that were gathered in the absence of this additional motivation. We used a Bayesian beta regression model to estimate the size of the effect and associated variance. The results demonstrate that discrimination accuracy does indeed improve in the presence of performance-related rewards. However, there was no difference in eye movement strategy between the two groups, suggesting this improvement in accuracy was not due to the participants making more optimal eye movement decisions. Instead, the motivation encouraged participants to expend more effort on other aspects of the task, such as paying more attention to the boxes and making fewer response errors.
Original languageEnglish
Article number48
Number of pages14
JournalVision
Volume3
Issue number3
Early online date18 Sep 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2019

Fingerprint

Eye Movements
Motivation
Reward
Discrimination (Psychology)

Keywords

  • visual search
  • eye movements
  • attention
  • strategy
  • decision

Cite this

Inefficient Eye Movements : Gamification Improves Task Execution, But Not Fixation Strategy. / James, Warren R. G.; Reuther, Josephine; Angus, Ellen; Clarke, Alasdair D. F.; Hunt, Amelia R. (Corresponding Author).

In: Vision, Vol. 3, No. 3, 48, 09.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

James, Warren R. G. ; Reuther, Josephine ; Angus, Ellen ; Clarke, Alasdair D. F. ; Hunt, Amelia R. / Inefficient Eye Movements : Gamification Improves Task Execution, But Not Fixation Strategy. In: Vision. 2019 ; Vol. 3, No. 3.
@article{c610a5a08ab145b2873f3e86cbd325cd,
title = "Inefficient Eye Movements: Gamification Improves Task Execution, But Not Fixation Strategy",
abstract = "Decisions about where to fixate are highly variable and often inefficient. In the current study, we investigated whether such decisions would improve with increased motivation. Participants had to detect a discrimination target, which would appear in one of two boxes, but only after they chose a location to fixate. The distance between boxes determines which location to fixate to maximise the probability of being able to see the target: participants should fixate between the two boxes when they are close together, and on one of the two boxes when they are far apart. We “gamified” this task, giving participants easy-to-track rewards that were contingent on discrimination accuracy. Their decisions and performance were compared to previous results that were gathered in the absence of this additional motivation. We used a Bayesian beta regression model to estimate the size of the effect and associated variance. The results demonstrate that discrimination accuracy does indeed improve in the presence of performance-related rewards. However, there was no difference in eye movement strategy between the two groups, suggesting this improvement in accuracy was not due to the participants making more optimal eye movement decisions. Instead, the motivation encouraged participants to expend more effort on other aspects of the task, such as paying more attention to the boxes and making fewer response errors.",
keywords = "visual search, eye movements, attention, strategy, decision",
author = "James, {Warren R. G.} and Josephine Reuther and Ellen Angus and Clarke, {Alasdair D. F.} and Hunt, {Amelia R.}",
note = "Funding: This research was funded by the James S. McDonnell Foundation (scholar award to Amelia Hunt).",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
doi = "10.3390/vision3030048",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
journal = "Vision",
issn = "2411-5150",
publisher = "MDPI",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inefficient Eye Movements

T2 - Gamification Improves Task Execution, But Not Fixation Strategy

AU - James, Warren R. G.

AU - Reuther, Josephine

AU - Angus, Ellen

AU - Clarke, Alasdair D. F.

AU - Hunt, Amelia R.

N1 - Funding: This research was funded by the James S. McDonnell Foundation (scholar award to Amelia Hunt).

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - Decisions about where to fixate are highly variable and often inefficient. In the current study, we investigated whether such decisions would improve with increased motivation. Participants had to detect a discrimination target, which would appear in one of two boxes, but only after they chose a location to fixate. The distance between boxes determines which location to fixate to maximise the probability of being able to see the target: participants should fixate between the two boxes when they are close together, and on one of the two boxes when they are far apart. We “gamified” this task, giving participants easy-to-track rewards that were contingent on discrimination accuracy. Their decisions and performance were compared to previous results that were gathered in the absence of this additional motivation. We used a Bayesian beta regression model to estimate the size of the effect and associated variance. The results demonstrate that discrimination accuracy does indeed improve in the presence of performance-related rewards. However, there was no difference in eye movement strategy between the two groups, suggesting this improvement in accuracy was not due to the participants making more optimal eye movement decisions. Instead, the motivation encouraged participants to expend more effort on other aspects of the task, such as paying more attention to the boxes and making fewer response errors.

AB - Decisions about where to fixate are highly variable and often inefficient. In the current study, we investigated whether such decisions would improve with increased motivation. Participants had to detect a discrimination target, which would appear in one of two boxes, but only after they chose a location to fixate. The distance between boxes determines which location to fixate to maximise the probability of being able to see the target: participants should fixate between the two boxes when they are close together, and on one of the two boxes when they are far apart. We “gamified” this task, giving participants easy-to-track rewards that were contingent on discrimination accuracy. Their decisions and performance were compared to previous results that were gathered in the absence of this additional motivation. We used a Bayesian beta regression model to estimate the size of the effect and associated variance. The results demonstrate that discrimination accuracy does indeed improve in the presence of performance-related rewards. However, there was no difference in eye movement strategy between the two groups, suggesting this improvement in accuracy was not due to the participants making more optimal eye movement decisions. Instead, the motivation encouraged participants to expend more effort on other aspects of the task, such as paying more attention to the boxes and making fewer response errors.

KW - visual search

KW - eye movements

KW - attention

KW - strategy

KW - decision

U2 - 10.3390/vision3030048

DO - 10.3390/vision3030048

M3 - Article

VL - 3

JO - Vision

JF - Vision

SN - 2411-5150

IS - 3

M1 - 48

ER -