ArticleBehavior research methods2026
The fundamentals of eye tracking, Part 7: Determining data quality.
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.
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.
- How Source Attribution Visualization Shapes User Attention and Preference: An Eye-Tracking Study of Four AI Chatbot Layouts.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the quality of eye-tracking recordings, often characterized using accuracy, precision, and data loss, is crucial for the interpretation of eye tracking data. Eye-tracking data quality can furthermore place fundamental limits on what studies can be conducted with an eye tracker, and one may be required to report eye-tracking data quality when publishing a study. However, how does one determine the quality of eye-tracking data? This article provides an overview of operationalizations of accuracy, precision, and data loss and practical advice for determining eye-tracking data quality. Furthermore, the programming code for calculating various quality metrics for a segment of eye-tracking data is provided in MATLAB, Python, and R. Also provided is ETDQualitizer, a tool designed to enable anyone to easily determine the data quality of their recordings. We provide a version that is browser-based ( https://dcnieho.github.io/ETDQualitizer ) and enables determining eye-tracking data quality without installation or programming, while ensuring data privacy by running entirely locally. ETDQualitizer is further provided as a MATLAB, Python, and R library ( https://github.com/dcnieho/ETDQualitizer ) that can be integrated in one's analysis scripts. We hope that this article enables any researcher to determine, critically evaluate, and report on eye-tracking data quality, and that it spurs researchers to adopt a data quality perspective in all their future eye-tracking studies.
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.