From Avatars to Bodies: Replicating the Shared-Attention Cue Hierarchy in the Real World

Master Thesis open

Project overview

Our recent VR dyad study found that observers decode where an avatar’s operator attends almost entirely from gross body orientation, with the head-on-torso rotation as the one unique cue and no measurable contribution from the rendered eyes. Everything in that study passed through an avatar-rendering pipeline. The obvious and hard question: does the same hierarchy hold between two physical people in a physical room, where real eyes with real sclera contrast are visible and nothing is retargeted or smoothed?

Project motivation

If the body-first hierarchy replicates face to face, it is a property of human social perception at these distances, and the psychophysics of peripheral gaze perception [1] would gain a strong ecological confirmation. If instead real eyes outperform rendered eyes, the gap isolates exactly what current avatar eye pipelines lose (resolution, latency, micro-movements), which is precisely what engine developers need to know [2]. Methodologically the project is a challenge in its own right: measuring shared attention without an HMD requires mobile eye tracking, motion capture without occluding the face, and a response method that does not re-introduce a display.

Project goals

  1. Real-world paradigm. Adapt the decoding task to a physical room: a Sender wearing mobile eye-tracking glasses and a mocap suit attends wall targets; a Receiver indicates the attended target (for example with a laser pointer or numbered grid), with the same 22.5 degree spacing as the parent study for comparability.
  2. Cross-medium comparison. Run matched real and VR sessions within participants and compare the cue hierarchies (body, head, eyes) between media, using the existing variance-decomposition pipeline on the mocap features.

You will

  • Perform a literature review on gaze perception in real versus mediated settings
  • Design the physical setup (OptiTrack, Pupil-style mobile eye tracker, response method)
  • Adapt the existing preprocessing and feature pipeline to the real-world recordings
  • Run the study and compare cue hierarchies across media
  • Summarize your findings in a thesis and present them to an audience
  • (Optional) co-write a research paper

You need

  • Strong communication skills in English
  • Hands-on attitude toward hardware and calibration
  • Python skills (data pipelines); Unity is a plus for the VR arm

References

  1. Loomis, J. M., Kelly, J. W., Pusch, M., Bailenson, J. N., & Beall, A. C. (2008). Psychophysics of perceiving eye-gaze and head direction with peripheral vision. Perception, 37(9). https://doi.org/10.1068/p5896
  2. Waltemate, T., Senna, I., Hülsmann, F., Rohde, M., Kopp, S., Ernst, M., & Botsch, M. (2016). The impact of latency on perceptual judgments and motor performance in closed-loop interaction in virtual reality. VRST 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/2993369.2993381
  3. Bangerter, A. (2004). Using Pointing and Describing to Achieve Joint Focus of Attention in Dialogue. Psychological Science, 15(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00694.x
  4. The parent study on avatar-mediated shared attention in virtual reality; details are available from the advisor on request.

Keywords: Real World, Mobile Eye Tracking, OptiTrack, Shared Attention, Replication

Interested in this topic? Reach out through your university student email address via the contact form, with a short motivation, your transcript of records and, if available, a CV.

← All topics