|
|
|
|
|
by natebleker
2169 days ago
|
|
Disclaimer, I am the primary engineer of a commercial eye tracking system. Tools like these popup every now and then are a nice tool for rough estimation of gaze. Fixation tracking is a large complicated issue that usually requires some sort of calibration to get more precise results. By sidestepping the calibration problem, much higher subject compliance can be achieved since you don't have a grad student barking confusing order at you. The downside to this is the noise you see in the tracking results. For those interested a product that produces similar results is
pupil labs ambient gaze tracking "Core" research headset[0].
[0] https://pupil-labs.com/products/core/ |
|
For usability testing, physical eye trackers have to be used one person at a time (no simultaneous use), use an experimenter's time to schedule and administer, can only be used for a short period, and only work with local participants. But yes they will probably always have better accuracy, and detect saccades/fixations better which are also great for psychology studies.
The other thing is if you want to make a consumer application (like browser game, or accessibility mode), then it's more practical to have people just consent to having their webcam turned on, than to go out and buy an eye tracker.