ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Utilization of Eye-Tracking Metrics to Evaluate User Experiences-Technology Description and Preliminary Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Pictogram and Typeface Complexity on Visual Attention: Eye-Tracking Study.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines the feasibility of applying eye tracking as a rigorous method for assessing user experience in web design. A controlled experiment was conducted with 102 participants, who interacted with both guideline-compliant websites and systematically degraded variants violating specific principles of Material Design 2. Eleven websites were presented in A/B conditions with modifications targeting three design dimensions: contrast, link clarity, and iconography. Eye-tracking indicators-time to first fixation, fixation duration, fixation count, and time to first click-are examined in conjunction with subjective ratings and expert assessments. Mixed-effects models are employed to ensure robust statistical inference. The results demonstrate that reduced contrast and unclear links consistently impair user performance and increase search effort, whereas the influence of icons is more context-dependent. The study contributes by quantifying the usability costs of guideline deviations and by validating a triangulated evaluation framework that combines objective, subjective, and expert data. From a practical perspective, the findings support the integration of eye tracking into A/B testing and guideline validation, providing design teams with empirical evidence to inform and prioritize improvements in user interfaces.
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.