Accuracy and precision of fixation locations recorded with the low-cost Eye Tribe tracker in different experimental set-ups

Abstract

This article compares the accuracy and precision of the low-cost Eye Tribe tracker and a well-established comparable eye tracker: SMI RED 250. Participants were instructed to fixate on predefined point locations on a screen. The accuracy is measured by the distance between the recorded fixation locations and the actual location. Precision is represented by the standard deviation of these measurements. Furthermore, the temporal precision of both eye tracking devices (sampling rate) is evaluated as well. The obtained results illustrate that a correct set-up and selection of software to record and process the data are of utmost importance to obtain acceptable results with the low-cost device. Nevertheless, with careful selections in each of these steps, the quality (accuracy and precision) of the recorded data can be considered comparable.

Using eye-tracking to investigate teacher gaze: Data accuracy and drawing of meaningful dynamic areas of interest in video stimuli

“…Data quality is a necessary parameter to establish the validity of eye-tracking results. There are several aspects which could affect the quality of the data, such as the properties of the eye-tracking apparatus, the environmental conditions of the location of the experiment (e.g., lighting), the position of the devices and also the calibration process (Holmqvist et al, 2011;Holmqvist et al, 2012;Nyström et al, 2013;Ooms et al, 2015). Calibration process refers to the procedure in which the subjects have to look at some predefined targets, and for each target, the eye-tracker associates the subject's eye image position with the location of the target (Nyström et al, 2013).…”

“…In order to be able to set consistent standards about the accuracy of data and compare the results across studies, reporting only the accuracy level of the eye-tracking system might not be enough since accuracy may vary among the participants and the experimental conditions (Blignaut & Beelders, 2009). Therefore, based on previous research (Blignaut & Wium, 2014;Holmqvist et al, 2011;Nyström et al, 2013;Ooms et al, 2015) and the current findings on dynamic AOIs, it could be suggested for further studies to report the accuracy level of their data after the invalid recordings (e.g., data with low tracking ratio) are excluded. Nevertheless, to set standard quality criteria, further research should investigate other important parameters regarding the eye-tracking data quality, such as the precision of the data and their influence on the eye movement metrics on dynamic AOIs, to enhance guidance on what quality criteria to report and consider when analyzing eye-tracking data.…”

A low-cost, high-performance video-based binocular eye tracker for psychophysical research

“…In comparison with other low-cost eye trackers, such as the EyeTribe or the PG3, our device has higher frequency (395 Hz against 30 or 60 Hz), which gives scientists the opportunity not only to measure basic saccades and fixations, but to also study smaller eye movements. Our eye tracker has higher precision (EyeRemote -0.38 degrees, Tobii T60XL Eye Tracker -0.16 degrees, Eye-Tribe -0.1 degrees) and better accuracy (EyeRemote -0.98 degrees, Tobii T60XL Eye Tracker -1.27 degrees, EyeTribe and PG3 -from 0.5 to 1 degrees) (Brand et al, 2020;Dalmaijer, 2014, Hosp et al, 2020Janthanasub & Meesad, 2015;Morgante at al., 2012;Ooms et al, 2015;Raynowska et al, 2018). Besides that, our eye tracker is fully binocular, which is very important for some psychophysical experiments.…”

“…Among the most successful devices are the Eye Tribe (Oculus VR, California, USA) (99$), the GazePoint (GP3) (Vancouver, Canada) (495$), and the Tobii EyeX Tracker (Stockholm, Sweden) (695$). The price of these devices is relatively low in comparison with other trackers from commercial companies, but the problem is that they do not always provide high frequency measurements (typically only reaching up to 60 Hz) or good accuracy and precision (Brand et al, 2020;Dalmaijer, 2014;Janthanasub & Meesad, 2015;Morgante et al, 2021;Ooms et al, 2015;Raynowska et al, 2018). It was shown that the accuracy of the EyeTribe and GP3 is in the range of 0.5 and 1 degrees (Janthanasub & Meesad, 2015), and the spatial resolution of EyeTribe is 0.1 degrees (Janthanasub & Meesad, 2015).…”

Differences in Thematic Map Reading by Students and Their Geography Teacher

“…The GazePoint eye-tracker is an inexpensive device similar to TheEyeTribe tracker and Tobii EyeX. The accuracy and precision of all these low-cost eye-trackers have been previously tested in the studies by Dalmaijer [58], Ooms, et al [59] and Popelka, et al [60]. Janthanasub and Meesad [61] tested the accuracy of the GazePoint 3 eye-tracker in their study.…”