Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Research Protocols
Date Submitted: Dec 22, 2020
Date Accepted: Jun 15, 2021
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Gaze Tracking as a Research Tool: Lessons Learned from the Deaf Health Literacy and Access to Health Information Project
ABSTRACT
Background:
Prior studies identify the internet as a major source of health information for many adults. Reliable and accessible sources of online health information are critical to cultivating patient-centered care. However, the accessibility and use of online health information remains largely unknown for deaf individuals. We used gaze-tracking technology to better understand the navigation and use of online health information of deaf adults who communicate with sign language, in comparison with hearing adults.
Objective:
The objective of this paper is to discuss the protocol of implementing gaze-tracking technology as a data collection method in a study that included both deaf and hearing participants.
Methods:
As part of a larger, multi-site mixed-methods research study, we conducted gaze-tracking sessions with 450 Deaf and 450 hearing participants. We also conducted follow up qualitative elicitation interviews with a subsample with 21 Deaf and 13 hearing participants to review a video recording of their gaze file and further assess their capacities for navigating and understanding health information online. To our knowledge, no study has implemented a similar research protocol. As such, we also examined research staff notes and observations from team meetings regarding the conduct of gaze-tracking data to delineate lessons learned and best practices for research protocols in this area.
Results:
Deaf individuals required additional protocol steps to minimize gaze disruption due to either lipreading or communicating in sign language. For example, research assistants were often unable to maintain eye contact with participants while signing due to the need to simultaneously point at the computer monitor to provide instructions related to gaze-study components such as the calibration process. In addition to developing ways to effectively provide instructions in ASL, a practice exercise was included in the gaze tracker session to acquaint participants to the computer and technology. The use of the playback features permitted deeper dialogue between researchers and participants, which we found vital to understanding the experiences of deaf participants.
Conclusions:
Based on our experience through a large research project, incorporating gaze-tracking technology poses both benefits and challenges to better understanding how individuals interact with health information. The lessons learned through this study will help future researchers determine ideal study designs, such as suitable protocols and participant characteristics (e.g., deaf signers), when including gaze trackers in their projects. Gaze tracking can determine the type and placement of visual content that gains attention from viewers of diverse backgrounds, including Deaf individuals. This approach explored how different ways of presenting health information can affect or enable visual learners to engage and use health information effectively.
Citation
