Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-s7d9s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-03T11:20:20.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pay attention to eye movement behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2025

Hayward J. Godwin Open the ORCID record for Hayward J. Godwin [Opens in a new window] ,
Michael C. Hout  and
Anthony S. Barnhart
Hayward J. Godwin*
Affiliation:
University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, England hayward.godwin@soton.ac.uk
Michael C. Hout
Affiliation:
New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, USA mhout@nmsu.edut
Anthony S. Barnhart
Affiliation:
Carthage College, Kenosha, WI, USA abarnhart@carthage.edu https://michaelhout.com/ http://www.anthonybarnhart.com/
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The review argues that researchers can and should disregard the examination of eye movement behavior when seeking to understand the role that peripheral vision plays in various tasks. We present specific examples to argue that eye movement behavior has and will continue to aid in confirming and disconfirming hypotheses regarding visual-cognitive information processing in a variety of tasks.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 48 , 2025 , e141
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Becker, S. I. (2011). Determinants of dwell time in visual search: Similarity or perceptual difficulty? PLoS ONE, 6(3), e17740. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017740 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96(3), 433–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.433 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geyer, T., Von Mühlenen, A., & Müller, H. J. (2007). What do eye movements reveal about the role of memory in visual search? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(7), 924–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600831119 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godwin, H. J., Hout, M. C., Alexdóttir, K. J., Walenchok, S. C., & Barnhart, A. S. (2021). Avoiding potential pitfalls in visual search and eye-movement experiments: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(7), 2753–2783. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02326-w CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godwin, H. J., Hout, M. C., & Menneer, T. (2014). Visual similarity is stronger than semantic similarity in guiding visual search for numbers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 689–695. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0547-4 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horowitz, T. S., & Wolfe, J. M. (1998). Visual search has no memory. Nature, 394(6693), 575–577. https://doi.org/10.1038/29068 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kristjánsson, Á. (2000). In search of remembrance: evidence for memory in visual search. Psychological Science, 11(4), 328–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00265 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liversedge, S. P., & Findlay, J. M. (2000). Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01418-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luria, S. M., & Strauss, M. S. (1975). Eye movements during search for coded and uncoded targets. Perception & Psychophysics, 17(3), 303–308. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memmert, D. (2006). The effects of eye movements, age, and expertise on inattentional blindness. Consciousness and Cognition, 15(3), 620–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2006.01.001 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, M. S., Kramer, A. F., Wang, R. F., Irwin, D. E., & McCarley, J. S. (2001). Visual search has memory. Psychological Science, 12(4), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00353 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K., & Fisher, D. L. (1987). Letter processing during eye fixations in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 42(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211517 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slattery, T. J., Angele, B., & Rayner, K. (2011). Eye movements and display change detection during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 37(6), 1924–1938. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024322 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, T. J., Lamont, P., & Henderson, J. M. (2012). The penny drops: Change blindness at fixation. Perception, 41(4), 489–492. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7092 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stroud, M. J., Menneer, T., Cave, K. R., & Donnelly, N. (2012). Using the dual-target cost to explore the nature of search target representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(1), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025887 Google ScholarPubMed
Tatler, B. W., & Vincent, B. T. (2009). The prominence of behavioural biases in eye guidance. Visual Cognition, 17(6–7), 1029–1054. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280902764539 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Mühlenen, A., Müller, H. J., & Müller, D. (2003). Sit-and-wait strategies in dynamic visual search. Psychological Science, 14(4), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.14441 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, L. G. (1967). The effects of target specification on objects fixated during visual search. Acta Psychologica, 27, 355–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(67)90080-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 15(3), 419–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar