I have to disagree. The entire argument of the article is that people learn a specific pattern for looking at websites that they don't use in other contexts; putting a blank screen in front of them wouldn't trigger this pattern.
The test subjects were looking at a large variety of websites. Some used the top-left logo design and some didn't, but this didn't seem to make a difference -- almost everyone looked up and left with their second fixation. I might update the post to make this more clear.
We didn't do eye tracking studies to confirm this, but in analyzing intuitively "good" images vs. "bad" ones, the good ones invariably catered to this kind of eye movement.
Websites control the eye so differently (and more rigidly) than how representational images do, that I wouldn't expect the two to generate similar viewer interactions.
And yet, GazeHawk's navigational info is at the top right. :)
It's also dependent on the subject matter and expectations of the subjects. Alfred Yarbus did eye tracking studies in the 60s that show that there is no "default" saccade path: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_tracking