Video conferences can introduce aspects of ambiguity regarding the other’s focus of attention, given that web cameras are positioned above the screen and that participants do not share the same physical space. On the other hand, other technologies can undermine this ability. For example, a laser pointer can aid a public speaker’s presentation by highlighting his/her focus of attention on projected slides. People’s proficiency at evaluating other’s focus of attention can be assisted by the use of various forms of technology. More specifically, studies highlight that the STS pools eye and head directional signals to inform estimates of the other’s direction of attention 12, 13. ![]() Human imaging research 9, 10, 11 reveals functional specialization to head and eye directional inputs in the posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus (STS) and the Inferior Temporal Lobule. ![]() The biological relevance of gaze is reflected in people’s extraordinary ability of evaluating eye and head orientation and identifying eye contact 7, 8, which are enabled by dedicated neural machinery. Mutual gaze (when we make eye contact with another person) is a precursor to most social exchanges, while averted gaze (when gaze is directed away from the other person) can signal the presence of environmental stimuli of potential interest, providing a behavioural channel for joint attention 4, 5, 6. Gaze behaviours carry important nonverbal information that inform and regulate interactions between individuals 1, 2, 3. We discuss the significance of AR reduced gaze determination in social-collaborative settings as well as theoretical implications regarding the impact of this technology on social behaviour. In the second experiment, we found that this modulatory effect was explained by participants’ assumptions concerning which plane the AR user was focusing on, irrespective of these being correct. ![]() In the first experiment we found that gaze discrimination was better when the participant was aware that the AR user was focusing on stimuli positioned on their depth plane as opposed to being positioned halfway between the AR user and the participant. In two psychophysical experiments, we assessed what impact assumptions concerning the positioning of virtual content attended by an AR user have on other people’s sensitivity to their gaze direction. A drawback of AR however is related to uncertainty regarding the AR user’s focus of attention in social-collaborative settings: an AR user looking in our direction might either be paying attention to us or to augmentations positioned somewhere in between. With AR, virtual content is overlaid on top of the real-world scene, offering unique data visualization and interaction opportunities. We investigated gaze direction determination in dyadic interactions mediated by an Augmented Reality (AR) head-mounted-display.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |