Most research uses simplified paradigms with artificial stimuli to gain insights into visually-guided behavior. Despite the advantages of stringent experimental control and the granular analysis of distinct mechanisms, a critical assumption remains largely untested: the extent to which evidence gathered in artificial settings is reflective of more complex natural behaviors. To address this, we asked: how much of the variance across observers in natural free-viewing behavior can be explained by established artificial paradigms assessing oculomotor control? A group of 50 observers completed a battery of tasks ranging from standard measurements of saccade or pursuit accuracy with simple, artificial stimuli to the free-viewing of naturalistic images or videos. Our findings revealed consistent individual differences in performance in each of the tasks; however, limited correlations were observed between them. Individual differences in saccade latencies for artificial stimuli accounted for approximately 10% of the observed variance in fixation durations in natural scenes. Similarly, saccade or pursuit accuracy did not show a strong relationship to the saccade amplitudes or frequency of pursuit in dynamic scenes. Notably, screen time on smartphones was not associated with measures in artificial tasks but demonstrated a significant correlation with fixation durations during free-viewing of natural scenes. Observers with increased screen time exhibited shorter fixation durations, highlighting an intriguing link between technology use and naturalistic gaze behavior. Our results emphasize that natural stimuli and tasks encompass features and components that are missing in artificial tasks with simple stimuli, thereby challenging the frequently assumed generalizability of findings derived from such paradigms.