Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 67, Issue 6, pp 997–1009 | Cite as

Look little, look often: The influence of gaze frequency on drawing accuracy

  • Dale J. CohenEmail author


The present article attempts to determine what those who draw accurately do differently than those who do not. Four experiments explore the relation between drawing accuracy and the rate at which artists glance between their drawing and the stimulus (termedgaze frequency). Experiment 1 revealed a positive relation between gaze frequency and drawing accuracy (r2=.33). Experiments 2, 3, and 4 demonstrated that gaze frequency directly influences drawing accuracy. High gaze frequencies may facilitate drawing accuracy by (1) allowing the artist to hold less information in working memory, (2) reducing memory distortion, and (3) facilitating the reduction of context effects through inattentional blindness.


Work Memory Drawing Process Perceptual Information Inattentional Blindness Large Face 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., Li, F., &Whitehead, S. D. (1992). Hand-eye coordination during sequential tasks.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B,337, 338–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., &Pelz, J. B. (1995). Memory representations in natural tasks.Cognitive Neuroscience,7, 66–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blakemore, C. (1973). The baffled brain. In R. L. Gregory & E. H. Gombrich (Eds.),Illusions in nature and art (pp. 9–48). New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  4. Blakemore, C., Carpenter, R. H. S., &Georgeson, M. A. (1970). Lateral inhibition between orientation detectors in the human visual system.Nature,228, 37–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, D. J., &Bennett, S. (1997). Why can’t most people draw what they see?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 609–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J., &Cohen, P. (1983).Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Deregowski, J. B. (1973). Illusion and culture. In R. L. Gregory & E. H. Gombrich (Eds.),Illusions in nature and art (pp. 161–192). New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  8. Diamond, R., &Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are not special: An effect of expertise.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edwards, B. (1999). Drawing on the right side of the brain (2nd rev. ed.). New York: Penguin Putnam, Tarcher.Google Scholar
  10. Epstein, W. (1977).Stability and constancy in visual perception: Mechanisms and processes. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, N. H. (1980). Strategies of representation in young children:Analysis of spatial skills and drawing processes. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, N. H. (1987). Current developments in the development of representational picture-production.Archives de Psychologie,55, 127–152.Google Scholar
  13. Gregory, R. L. (1990).Eye and brain (4th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hochberg, J. (1996). The perception of pictures and pictorial art. In M. P. Friedman & E. C. Carterette (Eds.),Cognitive ecology (pp. 151–204). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., &Duncan, S. (1991). Categories and particulars: Prototype effects in estimating spatial location.Psychological Review,93, 352–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kendall, R. (1993).Degas landscapes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kozbelt, A. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition.Visual Cognition,8, 705–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leder, H., &Bruce, V. (2000). When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,53A, 513–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee, M. (1989). When is an object not an object? The effect of “meaning” upon the copying of line drawings.British Journal of Psychology,80, 15–37.Google Scholar
  20. Mack, A., &Rock, I. (1998).Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Miall, R. C., &Tchalenko, J. (2001). A painter’s eye movements: A study of eye-hand movement during portrait painting.Leonardo,34, 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Murray, J. E., Yong, E., &Rhodes, G. (2000). Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces.Psychological Science,11, 492–496.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Nairne, J. S. (1996). Short-term/working memory. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.),Memory (pp. 101–128). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nunnaly, J. (1978).Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  25. Reith, E. (1988). The development of use of contour lines in children’s drawings of figurative and nonfigurative three-dimensional models.Archives de Psychologie,56, 83–103.Google Scholar
  26. Rock, I. (1983).The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rock, I. (1996).Indirect perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rosenberg, J. D. (1963).The genius of John Ruskin. New York: Braziller.Google Scholar
  29. Sze, M. (1956).The way of painting. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  30. Tanaka, J. W., &Sengco, J. A. (1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition.Memory & Cognition,25, 583–592.Google Scholar
  31. Thouless, R. H. (1932). Individual differences in phenomenal regression.British Journal of Psychology,22, 216–241.Google Scholar
  32. Van Sommers, P. (1984).Drawing and cognition: Descriptive and experimental studies of graphic production processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Werner, S., &Diedrichsen, J. (2002). The time course of spatial memory distortions.Memory & Cognition,30, 718–730.Google Scholar
  34. Willats, J. (1997).Art and representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Zeki, S. (1993).A vision of the brain. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of North CarolinaWilmington

Personalised recommendations