Home » Eye Tracking » How Do You Measure the Value of Eye Tracking?

How Do You Measure the Value of Eye Tracking?

How Do You Measure the Value of Eye Tracking? We recently wrote an article touching on some of the limitations of eye tracking. There are more. Of course, nothing is perfect, and many naysayers have legitimate concerns when it comes to eye tracking in the realm of usability. Most of these limitations are based around usability studies, which is certainly what most think about when they hear the phrase eye tracking. Usability consulting firms have seen success, convincing many designers that their website isn’t effective for this or that reason. But the fact of the matter is, there are limitations, and not knowing what to do with collected data can make for difficulty providing true insight into experience of the user.

Aside from steep startup costs or expensive and hard to find expertise, other limitations include eye tracking’s inability to monitor peripheral vision. Fixations don’t necessarily represent attention or understanding. Eye tracking heat maps show the combination of fixation points – where the fovea stop and take in information – and saccades – the eye movements between those fixations. Eye tracking doesn’t, however, reveal much about the higher-level processes of attention and comprehension – processes that are taking place in someone’s brain, like emotions, feelings, and thoughts they have as they’re navigating a website. If a person’s eyes fixate on a section of the page, it doesn’t necessarily mean he or she is consciously paying attention to that element. And even if they are paying attention to it, it doesn’t mean they understand it.

As a recent article states, “this is why eye tracking data has little meaning by itself.” The careful observation of usability tasks and further discussion is invaluable in understanding a study participant’s mental process. But even this makes for an altered review. That’s why it’s imperative that they are not exclusive; eye tracking needs verbal review (or something like it) and discussion of a process needs eye tracking (or something like it as well). Each section is supplementary and necessary to the other in order to provide any insight into the user experience in itself.

Because fixations are exactly that – fixations – they don’t provide meaning. A fixation shows where a study participant fixated, not the meaning of their fixation. A region that receives many fixations could indicate either attraction to an element there or perhaps difficulty in understanding that element.

The point that’s being made here is that eye tracking requires interpretation. Supplemental context can make for meaning, and that’s why you can’t use eye tracking by itself as the only tool for usability testing.

Eyetracking: Is It Worth It?

How Do You Measure the Value of Eye Tracking?

Categories