\section{Comparison of fixation maps}
A simple observation is that the centers of gravity of fixation points of monkeys are more off-center than are humans'. However this is most probably caused by lacking inter-trial fixation crosses for monkeys. 

different number of fixations 28 humans versus usually 1 monkey per image ... render comparisons difficult...

Low correlations on all images between the fixations of human and monkey participants as compared to inter-species emphasize this fact. In fig. \ref{correlations} it can be seen that fixations between monkeys and humans differ in fact very much. Correlations of the probability density functions of monkeys and humans on the same images do not differ significantly (kstest) from correlations between random humans on random images. 
% bootstrapping thing that I presented at the tea-time

\begin{figure}[!htb]
\label{correlations}
\centering
\fbox{ \begin{minipage}{\textwidth}\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{correlations.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Bootstrapped correlations of fixated regions}
% very lavish description
This plot indicates how much a subject's locations of fixations correlated with the others on the 38 images that Clark and Disco both saw. The plot indicates how a particular subject correlated on average (median) with subject x. The errorbars show the standard error over the images. 
\end{minipage} }
\end{figure}

% now the modified bootstrap sampling: ...
