» Articles » PMID: 38470925

Individual Differences in Human Gaze Behavior Generalize from Faces to Objects

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2024 Mar 12
PMID 38470925
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Individuals differ in where they fixate on a face, with some looking closer to the eyes while others prefer the mouth region. These individual biases are highly robust, generalize from the lab to the outside world, and have been associated with social cognition and associated disorders. However, it is unclear, whether these biases are specific to faces or influenced by domain-general mechanisms of vision. Here, we juxtaposed these hypotheses by testing whether individual face fixation biases generalize to inanimate objects. We analyzed >1.8 million fixations toward faces and objects in complex natural scenes from 405 participants tested in multiple labs. Consistent interindividual differences in fixation positions were highly inter-correlated across faces and objects in all samples. Observers who fixated closer to the eye region also fixated higher on inanimate objects and vice versa. Furthermore, the inter-individual spread of fixation positions scaled with target size in precisely the same, non-linear manner for faces and objects. These findings contradict a purely domain-specific account of individual face gaze. Instead, they suggest significant domain-general contributions to the individual way we look at faces, a finding with potential relevance for basic vision, face perception, social cognition, and associated clinical conditions.

Citing Articles

Visuospatial computations vary by category and stream and continue to develop in adolescence.

Yao J, Choo J, Finzi D, Grill-Spector K bioRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 39868259 PMC: 11761743. DOI: 10.1101/2025.01.14.633067.


Individual gaze shapes diverging neural representations.

Borovska P, de Haas B Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(36):e2405602121.

PMID: 39213176 PMC: 11388360. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2405602121.


Individual differences in face salience and rapid face saccades.

Broda M, Borovska P, de Haas B J Vis. 2024; 24(6):16.

PMID: 38913016 PMC: 11204136. DOI: 10.1167/jov.24.6.16.


Oculomotor routines for perceptual judgments.

Aizenman A, Gegenfurtner K, Goettker A J Vis. 2024; 24(5):3.

PMID: 38709511 PMC: 11078167. DOI: 10.1167/jov.24.5.3.

References
1.
Tanaka J, Sung A . The "Eye Avoidance" Hypothesis of Autism Face Processing. J Autism Dev Disord. 2013; 46(5):1538-52. PMC: 3997654. DOI: 10.1007/s10803-013-1976-7. View

2.
de Haas B, Sereno M, Schwarzkopf D . Inferior Occipital Gyrus Is Organized along Common Gradients of Spatial and Face-Part Selectivity. J Neurosci. 2021; 41(25):5511-5521. PMC: 8221599. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2415-20.2021. View

3.
Greenwood J, Szinte M, Sayim B, Cavanagh P . Variations in crowding, saccadic precision, and spatial localization reveal the shared topology of spatial vision. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017; 114(17):E3573-E3582. PMC: 5410794. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1615504114. View

4.
Broda M, de Haas B . Individual fixation tendencies in person viewing generalize from images to videos. Iperception. 2022; 13(6):20416695221128844. PMC: 9638695. DOI: 10.1177/20416695221128844. View

5.
Himmelberg M, Winawer J, Carrasco M . Linking individual differences in human primary visual cortex to contrast sensitivity around the visual field. Nat Commun. 2022; 13(1):3309. PMC: 9192713. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-31041-9. View