ArticleJournal of eye movement research2026
Visual Evaluation Strategies in Art Image Viewing: An Eye-Tracking Comparison of Art-Educated and Non-Art Participants.
Article in Journal of eye movement research, 2026. 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.
- Data-Driven Insights into E-Learning: A Comprehensive Review of Eye-Tracking Applications in Learning Systems.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Review
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
Understanding how tacit knowledge embedded in visual materials is accessed and utilized during evaluation tasks remains a key challenge in human-computer interaction and visual expertise research. Although eye-tracking studies have identified systematic differences between experts and novices, findings remain inconsistent, particularly in art-related visual evaluation contexts. This study examines whether tacit aspects of visual evaluation can be inferred from gaze behavior by comparing individuals with and without formal art education. Visual evaluation was assessed using a structured, prompt-based task in which participants inspected artistic images and responded to items targeting specific visual elements. Eye movements were recorded using a screen-based eye-tracking system. Areas of Interest (AOIs) corresponding to correct-answer regions were defined a priori based on expert judgment and item prompts. Both AOI-level metrics (e.g., fixation count, mean, and total visit and gaze durations) and image-level metrics (e.g., fixation count, saccade count, and pupil size) were analyzed using appropriate parametric and non-parametric statistical tests. The results showed that participants with an art-education background produced more fixations within AOIs, exhibited longer mean and total AOI visit and gaze durations, and demonstrated lower saccade counts than participants without art education. These patterns indicate more systematic and goal-directed gaze behavior during visual evaluation, suggesting that formal art education may shape tacit visual evaluation strategies. The findings also highlight the potential of eye tracking as a methodological tool for studying expertise-related differences in visual evaluation processes.
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.