ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2025
Temporal dynamics in attentional bias toward shopping cues among problematic online shoppers.
Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Online shopping has become a primary form of consumption in daily life, inevitably accompanied by the emergence of problematic online shopping. Attentional bias towards online shopping cues influences individuals' online shopping behavior. This study examined attentional bias mechanisms in problematic online shoppers using two experiments. Methods: This study combines the dot-probe task and eye-tracking technology to explore attentional bias and temporal dynamics toward shopping-related cues among problematic online shoppers. Experiment 1 recruited 84 participants to investigate attentional bias toward proximal cues, while Experiment 2 recruited 76 participants to examine attentional bias toward distal cues. Results: The results of Experiment 1 showed that both problematic online shoppers and control individuals exhibited shorter first fixation latency, longer gaze duration, and total fixation duration toward proximal cues. And only problematic online shoppers exhibited slower first exit saccade velocity and average exit saccade velocity. The results of Experiment 2 indicated that problematic online shoppers exhibited longer gaze duration and total fixation duration, as well as faster first entry saccade velocity toward distal cues. Discussion and conclusions: In summary, problematic online shoppers exhibit similar attentional bias toward both shopping proximal and distal cues, which are presented as the vigilance-maintenance pattern. For problematic online shoppers, distal cues have gradually acquired incentive value comparable to that of proximal cues. However, it should be noted that control individuals also exhibited attentional bias toward proximal cues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.