Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects. / Kovic, Vanja; Plunkett, Kim; Westermann, Gert.
In: Psihologija, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2009, p. 417-436.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Kovic, V, Plunkett, K & Westermann, G 2009, 'An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects', Psihologija, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 417-436. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI0904417K

APA

Kovic, V., Plunkett, K., & Westermann, G. (2009). An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects. Psihologija, 42(4), 417-436. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI0904417K

Vancouver

Kovic V, Plunkett K, Westermann G. An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects. Psihologija. 2009;42(4):417-436. doi: 10.2298/PSI0904417K

Author

Kovic, Vanja ; Plunkett, Kim ; Westermann, Gert. / An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects. In: Psihologija. 2009 ; Vol. 42, No. 4. pp. 417-436.

Bibtex

@article{8173ef26b71f441782f9fbfa9ee55f21,
title = "An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects",
abstract = "Unlike the animate objects, where participants were consistent in their looking patterns, for inanimates it was difficult to identify both consistent areas of fixations and a consistent order of fixations. Furthermore, in comparison to animate objects, inanimates received significantly shorter total looking time, shorter longest looks and a smaller number of overall fixations. However, as with animates, looking patterns did not systematically differ between the naming and non-naming conditions. These results suggested that animacy, but not labelling, impacts on looking behaviour in this paradigm. In the light of feature-based accounts of semantic memory organization, one could interpret these findings as suggesting that processing of the animate objects is based on the saliency/diagnosticity of their visual features (which is then reflected through participants eye-movements towards those features), whereas processing of the inanimate objects is based more on functional features (which cannot be easily captured by looking behaviour in such a paradigm).",
keywords = "inanimate objects, eye-tracking, mental representations, CATEGORY, IDENTIFICATION, DEFICITS, ACCOUNT, THINGS, BRAIN",
author = "Vanja Kovic and Kim Plunkett and Gert Westermann",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.2298/PSI0904417K",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "417--436",
journal = "Psihologija",
issn = "0048-5705",
publisher = "Serbian Psychological Society",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - An eye-tracking study of inanimate objects

AU - Kovic, Vanja

AU - Plunkett, Kim

AU - Westermann, Gert

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Unlike the animate objects, where participants were consistent in their looking patterns, for inanimates it was difficult to identify both consistent areas of fixations and a consistent order of fixations. Furthermore, in comparison to animate objects, inanimates received significantly shorter total looking time, shorter longest looks and a smaller number of overall fixations. However, as with animates, looking patterns did not systematically differ between the naming and non-naming conditions. These results suggested that animacy, but not labelling, impacts on looking behaviour in this paradigm. In the light of feature-based accounts of semantic memory organization, one could interpret these findings as suggesting that processing of the animate objects is based on the saliency/diagnosticity of their visual features (which is then reflected through participants eye-movements towards those features), whereas processing of the inanimate objects is based more on functional features (which cannot be easily captured by looking behaviour in such a paradigm).

AB - Unlike the animate objects, where participants were consistent in their looking patterns, for inanimates it was difficult to identify both consistent areas of fixations and a consistent order of fixations. Furthermore, in comparison to animate objects, inanimates received significantly shorter total looking time, shorter longest looks and a smaller number of overall fixations. However, as with animates, looking patterns did not systematically differ between the naming and non-naming conditions. These results suggested that animacy, but not labelling, impacts on looking behaviour in this paradigm. In the light of feature-based accounts of semantic memory organization, one could interpret these findings as suggesting that processing of the animate objects is based on the saliency/diagnosticity of their visual features (which is then reflected through participants eye-movements towards those features), whereas processing of the inanimate objects is based more on functional features (which cannot be easily captured by looking behaviour in such a paradigm).

KW - inanimate objects

KW - eye-tracking

KW - mental representations

KW - CATEGORY

KW - IDENTIFICATION

KW - DEFICITS

KW - ACCOUNT

KW - THINGS

KW - BRAIN

U2 - 10.2298/PSI0904417K

DO - 10.2298/PSI0904417K

M3 - Journal article

VL - 42

SP - 417

EP - 436

JO - Psihologija

JF - Psihologija

SN - 0048-5705

IS - 4

ER -