This presentation was given to the Testing and Assessment Methods class (MS in Human Factors in Information Design) at Bentley University.

1. Eye Tracking and
Neuromarketing Primer
Quantitative to boost the qualitative
Dan Berlin, MBA, MSHFID

2. Hi!
• Psychology and generally geeky background
• Graduated Bentley in 2008
• Two years at One to One Interactive
▫ Usability and neuromarketing studies
• Left this past summer to start my own consultancy
• dan@berlinconsulting.net
• Twitter: @banderlin

3. Agenda
• Eye Tracking
▫ Background
▫ Equipment
▫ Methods
▫ The great debate
• Neuromarketing
▫ Background
▫ The Players
▫ The debate continues
• War Stories
• Q&A

5. Eye Tracking – history
• Eye tracking has been around since the late 19th
century

6. Eye Tracking – equipment
• Two main players: &
▫ Tobii
 Based in Sweden, offers the same equipment for
scientific research, & has assistive technology products
▫ SMI
 Based in Germany, offers high-end & integrated
equipment for scientific research

7. Eye Tracking – equipment
1750 T60/120 T60 XL X60/120 Tobii Glasses
• 1750 & X60: old technology is old • You probably don’t need 120 Hz
• T60 & XL: depends on your needs • Tobii studio and Axure wireframes
• Glasses: brand new do not play nicely together
• depends on IR markers
• only 30 Hz
• small DVR

8. Eye Tracking – equipment
RED iView X HED
• RED
• 60/120 Hz (also have 250 Hz model) • Germaphobes: gotta clean that hat
• Use a screen up to 300”
• iView X HED • Software advantage: moving AOIs &
• Up to 200 Hz better statistical analysis
• Uses a notebook or subcomputer
• No IR markers

9. When is Eye Tracking Appropriate?
• The age old question…
• In usability studies
▫ NOT during think-aloud
 It is natural for a participant to look at the moderator
 And they will look at parts of the screen that they are talking about
▫ Does retrospective think-aloud alleviate this?
 It asks participants to remember what they were unconsciously
thinking
 More likely: primacy and recency effects (Michael Summers, TrueAction)
▫ Allocate a few tasks to eye tracking where the user does not think-
aloud
▫ Avoid bias: make up a story for the calibration

10. When is Eye Tracking Appropriate?
• In benchmark studies
▫ Comparing user behavior to different design or interaction concepts
▫ No think-aloud, just explore the site
 Can be done with a static composition or a wireframe
 Compare, compare, compare – there are no benchmarks
▫ Use metrics to determine if participants are looking at areas of interest
 Not all AOIs are equal – some should be more important to the
business
▫ Static pages: 10 to 20 second exposure
 Otherwise: the big red blob – they look everywhere
Eye Tracking is a tool, not a methodology!

11. Eye Tracking Output
• The typical outputs from eye tracking:
▫ Fixations & duration
▫ Time to 1st fixation
▫ Gaze plots & heat maps
▫ Areas of interest (AOIs)
▫ Pupil dilation

12. Eye Tracking Metrics
• Fixations vs. duration
▫ Basically, they are the same
 Both measure levels of active attention and cognition
▫ We will never know if an increased duration indicates confusion
or interest
▫ Fixations per second is the traditional measure of active
attention
• Gaze plots and heat maps
▫ Eye candy and not much else – but clients love them
▫ Bolster your eye candy with data!
• Pupil dilation
▫ Impossible to measure accurately – don’t use it

13. Ok, so how should I use eye tracking metrics?
• Use areas of interest to compare metrics
▫ How many fixations are in (un)important AOIs?
 Will determine if an important AOI needs more
emphasis
▫ How do fixations in similar AOIs compare
between different design treatments?
 Will determine which design better achieves
business goals
▫ How long does it take participants to get to a
particular AOI? (time to 1st fixation)
 You only have a few seconds to impress a user –
are they looking at that which you want them to?

17. Participant Recruitment
• Make sure you ask about eye ailments
▫ Retina & cornea damage, eye cancer & tumors,
macular degeneration, cataracts, conjunctivitis,
and nystagmus
▫ Not necessarily problematic: amblyopia, glaucoma,
and strabismus
• If possible, you want to use the data from everyone
you bring in
▫ Add questions to your screener to ensure you can
eye track your participants

18. The great eye tracking debate
• If a person looks at something, does that mean that he
comprehends it?
▫ Maybe
• Does a long duration indicate confusion or interest?
▫ It depends
• Does eye tracking really help the usability cause?
▫ I think so
• Isn’t it all just crap?
▫ Not really – eye tracking gives us data to backup qualitative
findings

20. Neuromarketing – background
• Modern neuromarketing is born • Some current vendors measure EEG
from fMRIs instead
▫ Brain loci with oxygenated blood ▫ Electrical activity on the scalp
▫ Perform a task or present a stimulus ▫ Brain waves indicate what the person
and watch where the blood goes is experiencing
▫ Relies on knowledge about brain  Pleasure, anxiety, fight or flight, etc
loci… and a large fMRI machine ▫ Relies on interpretations of EEGs

21. Neuromarketing – the players
Company Method Location Notes
NeuroFocus EEG + GSR Berkeley • Owned by Nielsen
• Just proposed
“NeuroStandards” for
the field
EmSense EEG San Francisco • Developed own
headset
InnerScope Biometrics Boston • Campbells label
Sands Research EEG + Biometrics El Paso • Super Bowl study
OTOinsights EEG + self report Boston • Uses Emotiv headset
Buyology Consultant NYC • Think-tank
Neurosciencemarketingblog.com is a great source of information

22. Neuromarketing – studies
• Daimler-Chrysler fMRI study
▫ Attractive cars light up the facial recognition area of the brain
• Campbell’s Soup label
There is
no “buy”
button in
the brain!

23. Neuromarketing – the great debate
• Is neuromarketing ethical?
• How do we know the results are accurate?
• Show me the ROI!

24. War Stories

25. Creep Map
• 1 minute exposure
• These are the only
hotspots on the entire page
• When asked why this
design comp was given a low
rating, the response:
“because she’s fat”
• Oy vey

26. Q&A