Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41559434›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2026

Test-retest reliability of the gaze index for sign-tracking and goal-tracking.

Marco Badioli, Claudio Danti, Luigi Degni, Gianluca Finotti, Valentina Bernardi, Lorenzo Mattioni, Francesca Starita, Giuseppe di Pellegrino, Sara Giovagnoli, Mariagrazia Benassi and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Marco BadioliDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-5725-7972
Claudio DantiDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Luigi DegniDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Gianluca FinottiDepartment of Psychology, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK.
Valentina BernardiDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Lorenzo MattioniDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Francesca StaritaDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Giuseppe di PellegrinoDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Sara GiovagnoliDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Mariagrazia BenassiDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy.
Sara GarofaloDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Via Rasi e Spinelli, 176, Cesena, Italy. sara.garofalo@unibo.it.

Funding

Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca 20209WKCLLNextGenerationEU 2022W5TTK8NextGenerationEU P2022KAZ45_001NextGenerationEU PE0000006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In animal research, reward-predictive cues shape behavior through Pavlovian conditioning, yet animals vary in the value they assign to these cues. Sign-trackers (ST) attribute both incentive and predictive values to the cues, orienting their attention to them, while goal-trackers (GT) assign solely predictive value, orienting their attention rapidly toward the forthcoming reward. Although most animal studies report sign-tracking and goal-tracking as stable, trait-like behavioral profiles, human research has produced inconsistent results, raising questions about the reliability and the stability of this behavior. To address these issues, we investigated the test-retest reliability and stability of the classification over a four-month period of the gaze index most frequently adopted in human sign-tracking and goal-tracking literature. Our findings revealed good stability for sign-tracking behavior, but limited consistency for goal-tracking behavior. These results raise the possibility that goal-tracking may be either genuinely rare in the population or poorly captured by the current index. Overall, while the gaze index holds promise for identifying sign-tracking behavior, methodological refinements or alternative approaches may be needed to more reliably detect these behaviors in future research.

Indexed as

AttentionEye MovementsEye-Tracking TechnologyFixation, OcularGoalsAdultConditioning, ClassicalCuesFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsRewardYoung AdultEye trackingGoal-trackersPavlovian learningReinforcement learningReliabilitySign-trackers

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.