Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 1;44(5):469-478.
doi: 10.1177/0165025419885186. Epub 2019 Nov 3.

The robustness of eye-mouth index as an eye-tracking metric of social attention in toddlers

Nicholas E Souter  1 , Sudha Arunachalam  2 , Rhiannon J Luyster  1
Affiliations

The robustness of eye-mouth index as an eye-tracking metric of social attention in toddlers

Nicholas E Souter et al. Int J Behav Dev. .

Abstract

Eye-tracking research on social attention in infants and toddlers has included heterogeneous stimuli and analysis techniques. This allows measurement of looking to inner facial features under diverse conditions but restricts across-study comparisons. Eye-mouth index (EMI) is a measure of relative preference for looking to the eyes or mouth, independent of time spent attending to the face. The current study assessed whether EMI was more robust to differences in stimulus type than percent dwell time (PDT) toward the eyes, mouth, and face. Participants were typically developing toddlers aged 18 to 30 months (N = 58). Stimuli were dynamic videos with single and multiple actors. It was hypothesized that stimulus type would affect PDT to the face, eyes, and mouth, but not EMI. Generalized estimating equations demonstrated that all measures including EMI were influenced by stimulus type. Nevertheless, planned contrasts suggested that EMI was more robust than PDT when comparing heterogeneous stimuli. EMI may allow for a more robust comparison of social attention to inner facial features across eye-tracking studies.

Keywords: EMI; Eye-tracking; eye-mouth index; social attention; stimuli; stimulus; toddlers; typically developing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Still frame from the 1a condition.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Still frame from a ‘dyadic bid’ portion of the 1b condition.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Still frame from the 2a condition.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Still frame from the 2b condition.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Still frame from the 2c condition.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Screenshots of the AOIs used in the 1a (top left), 1b (top right), 2a (middle left), 2b (middle right), and 2c (bottom) conditions.
Figure 7:
Figure 7:
Bar charts with 95% confidence interval error bars for dependent variables across conditions for (a) face percent dwell time, (b) eyes percent dwell time, (c) mouth percent dwell time, and (d) eye-mouth index, N = 58.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bird G, Press C, & Richardson DC (2011). The role of alexithymia in reduced eye-fixation in autism spectrum conditions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 1556–1564. - PubMed
    1. Boardman JP, & Fletcher-Watson S (2017). What can eye-tracking tell us? Archives of Disease in Childhood, 102, 301–302. - PubMed
    1. Cassidy S, Mitchell P, Chapman P, & Ropar D (2015). Processing of spontaneous emotional responses in adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder: effect of stimulus type. Autism Research, 8(5), 534–544. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chawarska K, Macari S, & Shic F (2012). Context modulates attention to social scenes in toddlers with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(8), 1–10. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chawarska K, Macari S, & Shic F (2013). Decreased spontaneous attention to social scenes in 6-month-old infants later diagnosed with ASD. Biological Psychiatry, 74(3), 195–203. - PMC - PubMed