PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 5, 2026PLoS ONE0 citationsOpen Access

Vision Transformer attention alignment with human visual perception in aesthetic object evaluation

View Full Paper
MCMiguel CarrascoCGCésar González-MartínJAJosé Aranda

Key Points

  • The study aims to explore how well Vision Transformers align with human visual attention during aesthetic evaluations of handcrafted objects.
  • Conducted eye-tracking experiment with 30 participants viewing 20 artisanal objects.
  • Used Pupil Labs eye-tracker to record gaze patterns and generate heatmaps of human attention.
  • Analyzed attention maps from a pre-trained Vision Transformer model using DINO across 12 attention heads.
  • Compared human and ViT attention distributions with Kullback-Leibler divergence, SSIM, Pearson's CC, and Similarity metrics.
  • Optimal correlation with human attention found at Gaussian parameter σ=2.4 ± 0.03.
  • Attention head #12 displayed the strongest alignment with human visual patterns.
  • Significant differences observed among attention heads, with heads #7 and #9 diverging most from human attention (p ≤ 0.05).
  • ViT heads focused more on object features than background (p ≤ 0.0001), especially heads #12, #1, and #3 showing +30 to +40 percentage points lift.

Abstract

Visual attention mechanisms play a crucial role in human perception and aesthetic evaluation. Recent advances in Vision Transformers (ViTs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in computer vision tasks, yet their alignment with human visual attention patterns remains underexplored, particularly in aesthetic contexts. This study investigates the correlation between human visual attention and ViT attention mechanisms when evaluating handcrafted objects. We conducted an eye-tracking experiment with 30 participants (9 female, 21 male, mean age 24.6 years) who viewed 20 artisanal objects comprising basketry bags and ginger jars. Using a Pupil Labs eye-tracker, we recorded gaze patterns and generated heatmaps representing human visual attention. Simultaneously, we analyzed the same objects using a pre-trained ViT model with DINO (Self-DIstillation with NO Labels), extracting attention maps from each of the 12 attention heads. We compared human and ViT attention distributions using four complementary metrics—Kullback-Leibler divergence, Structural Similarity Index (SSIM), Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient (CC), and Similarity (SIM)—across varying Gaussian parameters ( σ = 0.1 − 4.0 ), yielding 1,152,000 distance evaluations. Additionally, we performed Areas of Interest (AOI) analysis to quantify ViT attention concentration within object regions. Statistical analysis revealed optimal correlation at σ = 2.4 ± 0.03 , with attention head #12 showing the strongest alignment with human visual patterns across all metrics. Significant differences were found between attention heads, with heads #7 and #9 demonstrating the greatest divergence from human attention ( p ≤ 0.05 ), Tukey HSD test). AOI analysis confirmed that all ViT heads concentrated attention significantly more within object regions than background areas ( p ≤ 0.0001 ), with heads #12, #1, and #3 achieving lift values of +30 to +40 percentage points. Results indicate that while ViTs exhibit more global attention patterns compared to human focal attention, certain attention heads can approximate human visual behavior, particularly for specific object features like buckles in basketry items. These findings suggest potential applications of ViT attention mechanisms in product design and aesthetic evaluation, while highlighting fundamental differences in attention strategies between human perception and current AI models.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Carrasco et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d1fc70a79560c99a0a211ahttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0344006
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper