Eye movement strategies in face ethnicity categorization vs. face identification tasks

A quick look at a face allows us to identify the person, their gender, and emotion. Humans direct their first eye movement towards points on the face that vary moderately across these common tasks and maximize performance. However, not known is the extent to which humans alter their oculomotor strategies to maximize accuracy in more specialized face categorization tasks. We studied the eye movements of Indian observers during a North vs. South Indian face categorization task and compared them to those in a person-identification task. We found that observers did not alter their first eye movement strategy for the ethnic categorization task, i.e., they directed their first fixations to a similar preferred point as in the person-identification task. To assess whether using a similar preferred point of fixation for both tasks resulted in a performance cost for the categorization task, we measured performance as a function of fixation position along the face. Fixating away from the preferred point of fixation reduced observer performance in the person identification task, but not in the ethnicity categorization task. We used computational modeling to assess whether the results could be explained by an interaction between the distribution of task information across the face and the foveated properties of the visual system. A foveated ideal observer analysis revealed a spatially more distributed task information and lower dependence of performance on the point of fixation for the ethnicity categorization task relative to the person identification. We conclude that, unlike the person identification task, humans can access the information for the ethnicity categorization task from various points of fixation. Thus, the observer strategy to utilize the typical person identification first eye movement for the ethnicity categorization task is a simple solution that incurs little or no performance cost.

[1]  Preeti Verghese,et al.  Active search for multiple targets is inefficient , 2010, Vision Research.

[2]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search , 2005, Nature.

[3]  Tomoharu Nagao,et al.  Extracted facial feature of racial closely related faces , 2010, International Conference on Digital Image Processing.

[4]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Initial eye movements during face identification are optimal and similar across cultures. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[5]  H. Bouwmeester,et al.  Transcriptome comparisons of in vitro intestinal epithelia grown under static and microfluidic gut-on-chip conditions with in vivo human epithelia , 2021, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Individual Differences in Eye Movements During Face Identification Reflect Observer-Specific Optimal Points of Fixation , 2013, Psychological science.

[7]  C. Wallraven,et al.  Predominance of eyes and surface information for face race categorization , 2021, Scientific Reports.

[8]  Janet H. Hsiao,et al.  The optimal viewing position in face recognition. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[9]  Wendy L. Braje,et al.  Human efficiency for recognizing 3-D objects in luminance noise , 1995, Vision Research.

[10]  Harish Katti,et al.  Are you from North or South India? A hard face-classification task reveals systematic representational differences between humans and machines , 2019, Journal of vision.

[11]  Jiri Najemnik,et al.  Eye movement statistics in humans are consistent with an optimal search strategy. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[12]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  A unified bayesian observer analysis for set size and cueing effects on perceptual decisions and saccades. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[13]  A. Hendrickson,et al.  Distribution of cones in human and monkey retina: individual variability and radial asymmetry. , 1987, Science.

[14]  G. Legge,et al.  Mr. Chips 2002: new insights from an ideal-observer model of reading , 2002, Vision Research.

[15]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Looking just below the eyes is optimal across face recognition tasks , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  K. Gegenfurtner The Interaction Between Vision and Eye Movements † , 2016, Perception.

[17]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Choice of saccade endpoint under risk. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[18]  P. Schyns,et al.  Show Me the Features! Understanding Recognition From the Use of Visual Information , 2002, Psychological science.

[19]  Eileen Kowler,et al.  Eye movements during visual search: the costs of choosing the optimal path , 2001, Vision Research.

[20]  Eileen Kowler Eye movements: The past 25years , 2011, Vision Research.

[21]  Hannah E Smithson,et al.  Compatible and incompatible representations in visual sensory storage. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[22]  Sheng Zhang,et al.  Optimal and human eye movements to clustered low value cues to increase decision rewards during search , 2015, Vision Research.

[23]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[24]  R. Shapley,et al.  Noise masking of White's illusion exposes the weakness of current spatial filtering models of lightness perception. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[25]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Domain Specificity of Oculomotor Learning after Changes in Sensory Processing , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  A. Bradley,et al.  Neural bandwidth of veridical perception across the visual field , 2016, Journal of vision.

[27]  I. Bülthoff,et al.  Looking at faces from different angles: Europeans fixate different features in Asian and Caucasian faces , 2013, Vision Research.

[28]  A Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. III. On Bayesian use of prior knowledge and cross correlation. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[29]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Individual differences in face-looking behavior generalize from the lab to the world. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[30]  Burak Erdeniz,et al.  The Other-Race and Other-Species Effect during a Sex Categorization Task: An Eye Tracker Study , 2020, Behavioral sciences.

[31]  G. Cottrell,et al.  Two Fixations Suffice in Face Recognition , 2008, Psychological science.

[32]  A. Atkinson,et al.  The impact on emotion classification performance and gaze behavior of foveal versus extrafoveal processing of facial features. , 2020, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  R. Hessels How does gaze to faces support face-to-face interaction? A review and perspective , 2020, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[34]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  The footprints of visual attention during search with 100% valid and 100% invalid cues , 2004, Vision Research.

[35]  Guomei Zhou,et al.  Self-Construal Priming Affects Holistic Face Processing and Race Categorization, but Not Face Recognition , 2019, Front. Psychol..

[36]  Dwight J. Kravitz,et al.  Start Position Strongly Influences Fixation Patterns during Face Processing: Difficulties with Eye Movements as a Measure of Information Use , 2012, PloS one.

[37]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Learning optimal eye movements to unusual faces , 2014, Vision Research.

[38]  H. Barlow The absolute efficiency of perceptual decisions. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.