Examining the validity of the total dwell time of eye fixations to identify landmarks in a building

Abstract

It is uncertain to what extent the duration of eye fixations reflects the use of landmarks during navigation. Therefore, a study was conducted in which eye tracking data and route descriptions were collected of 23 participants who were highly familiar with the indoor test environment. Based on the total fixation time on different landmark categories, two measures were calculated, namely the calculated landmark category use and the probable landmark category use. Based on the ratio between these measures an object was considered to be a landmark or not. The results were then compared with the objects referenced to in written route instructions. It can be concluded that promising results were provided by this method to identify landmarks. This landmark identification criterion strongly reflected the landmarks that came forward in the written route instructions. However, issues related to the identification of structural landmarks remain a problem.

Let eyes tell: experimental research on university library signage system and users' wayfinding behavior

“…Based on other research findings (Ohm et al, 2014;Andersen et al, 2012;Duckham et al, 2010;Richter and Winter, 2014), the most commonly used wayfinding signages by interior wayfinding users can be divided by the likelihood. Because the number of signages is unrelated to the real wayfinding guidance effect and the single eye movement indicators cannot reflect the difference in feasibility among different types of wayfinding signage, we used the calculated landmark category use (CLCU) and probable landmark category use (PLCU) based on the eye fixation duration to characterize the feasibility of the markers during wayfinding (Pepijn, 2016).…”

“…They majored in 14 fields of study, including industrial design, business management, and electric engineering. The participant screening principles were the same as those reported by other scholars (Pepijn, 2016;Ohm et al, 2014).…”

“…The eye movement data were processed on Tobii Pro Lab according to signage identification criteria (Pepijn, 2016). The static images (called Snapshot) of 18 wayfinding signages (Table 1) in the divided AOIs were imported into the software.…”

Meaning of Gaze Behaviors in Individuals' Perception and Interpretation of Commercial Interior Environments: An Experimental Phenomenology Approach Involving Eye-Tracking

“…However, because ambient noise can vary, this finding may not be applied to all interior environments. Eye-tracking has been used in design studies on spatial identification, navigation, and wayfinding (Viaene et al, 2016;Tang and Auffrey, 2018;Su et al, 2021). Eye-tracking is a useful method to measure immediate gaze responses to visual stimuli; the cognitive process, including the emotional or conscious motives or triggers for eye-fixations on specific objects of the individual, can be sought through phenomenological measures, including interviews.…”

“…However, in some cases, the hypothesis might lead to overgeneralization or oversimplification, undermining the qualitative aspects of perception because mental processes are not always aligned with visual attention (Schindler and Lilienthal, 2019). Eye-tracking has been used in studies on visual behaviors of people in built environments, e.g., how individuals visually navigate space and orient themselves in environmental settings (Mazman and Altun, 2013;Viaene et al, 2016;Guntarik et al, 2018); how eye movement responds to other sensory input in wind parks (Yu et al, 2017). Cognitive studies on esthetic judgments argued that gaze fixations are affected by the symmetry in architecture, visual arts, and faces; visual behavior represents an aesthetic preference for visual configuration and balance (Treder, 2010;Hodgson, 2011;Giannouli, 2013).…”