Eye Tracking in the Wild: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleScientificpeer-review


Modelling human cognition and behaviour in rich naturalistic settings and under conditions of free movement of the head and body is a major goal of visual science. Eye tracking has turned out to be an excellent physiological means to investigate how we visually interact with complex 3D environments, real and virtual. This review begins with a philosophical look at the advantages (the Good) and the disadvantages (the Bad) in approaches with different levels of ecological naturalness (traditional tightly controlled laboratory tasks, low- and high-fidelity simulators, fully naturalistic real-world studies). We then discuss in more technical terms the differences in approach required “in the wild”, compared to “received” lab-based methods. We highlight how the unreflecting application of lab-based analysis methods, terminology, and tacit assumptions can lead to poor experimental design or even spurious results (the Ugly). The aim is not to present a “cook-book” of best practices, but to raise awareness of some of the special concerns that naturalistic research brings about. References to helpful literature are provided along the way. The aim is to provide an overview of the landscape from the point of view of a researcher planning serious basic research on the human mind and behaviour.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Eye Movement Research
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)1-21
Number of pages21
Publication statusPublished - 29 Oct 2015
MoE publication typeA2 Review article in a scientific journal

Fields of Science

  • 6162 Cognitive science

Cite this