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

Cognition. 2021 Sep:214:104741. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104741. Epub 2021 Apr 30.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Eye movements; Meaning maps; Natural scenes; Saliency; Scene perception; Semantic information.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Comment

MeSH terms

  • Attention
  • Eye Movements
  • Fixation, Ocular*
  • Humans
  • Semantics*
  • Visual Perception