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.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call