I was very interested in this when the leading photos implied the use of eye tracking equipment used in the real world. I think those results would be extremel

I was very interested in this when the leading photos implied the use of eye tracking equipment used in the real world. I think those results would be extremely interesting to go over. Asking people to point out where they focus on some printed out photos is not remotely the same thing, I would not expect similar results. I tend to be "extremely" situationally aware compared to friends when out on the town or walking home, but I too would have likely pointed to the center of the photo in this test. In the real world I would be scanning my peripheral as well as doing intermittent "Crazy Ivan" checks behind me. edit: I think studies like this give "science" a bad name when you use words like "capture a hard truth" combined with data that obviously in no way does such a thing as the methodology simply cannot answer the question being asked. To be fair, a lot of this is on science journalism in general. The only question this study answered is the difference in where men and women click on photos presented to them in a certain context. As much as you try, you will not ignite the fight or flight emotional responses people have when walking into a potentially sketchy situation/area. This low effort "science" getting published and promoted in media is getting rather rote and exhausting lately.