Semantic Apparatus – There is no evidence that meaning maps capture semantic information relevant to gaze guidance: Reply to Henderson, Hayes, Peacock, and Rehrig (2021)

Cited by Lee Sonogan

The four conditions considered in the studies (Study 1: all conditions;...  | Download Scientific Diagram

Abstract by Marek A.PedziwiatrabMatthiasKümmerercThomas S.A.WallisdMatthiasBethgecChristophTeufela

The concerns raised by Henderson, Hayes, Peacock, and Rehrig (2021) are based on misconceptions of our work. We show that Meaning Maps (MMs) do not predict gaze guidance better than a state-of-the-art saliency model that is based on semantically-neutral, high-level features. We argue that there is therefore no evidence to date that MMs index anything beyond these features. Furthermore, we show that although alterations in meaning cause changes in gaze guidance, MMs fail to capture these alterations. We agree that semantic information is important in the guidance of eye-movements, but the contribution of MMs for understanding its role remains elusive.

Publication: Science Direct – Cognition (Peer-Reviewed Journal)

Pub Date: Sep, 2021 Doi:

Keywords: Eye movements, Natural scenes, Scene perception, Saliency, Meaning maps, Semantic information (Plenty more sections and references in research article)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.