Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42157988›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Pre-viewing context and visual attention in museum scenes: an exploratory eye-tracking study.

Xiaoyu Li, Jianmin Meng, Zixin Chen, Hailin Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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. Article
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

4 authors.

Xiaoyu LiSchool of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Jianmin MengSchool of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Zixin ChenSchool of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Hailin ChenSchool of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual attention in interpretive settings is shaped not only by image saliency but also by the context viewers receive before viewing. However, how different context formats relate to attention allocation in curated visual scenes remains under-specified, and findings are often sensitive to the evaluation metric used. We conducted an exploratory free-viewing eye-tracking study in which participants viewed keyframes from museum-oriented scenes after brief pre-viewing context presented in different formats. The dataset comprises gaze recordings from 10 participants across 30 images. Attention patterns were evaluated by comparing observed gaze distributions with a saliency-model baseline and summarizing correspondence through a multi-metric profile. The results indicate systematic block-level differences in gaze-reference correspondence and variability, suggesting that pre-viewing context can be reflected in where attention concentrates, while different metrics highlight different aspects of deviation. These findings offer a compact, metric-aware way to report context-associated attention differences in small-sample studies and inform interpretive design decisions where textual and graphical cues are used to shape viewing.

Indexed as

computational saliencyeye-trackingpre-viewing contextsaliency evaluation metricsvisual attention

Identifiers

PMID42157988
PMCPMC13180855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.