ArticleJournal of eye movement research2026
An Eye-Tracking and Forecasting Experiment on Consumer Purchasing Decisions Through Product Reviews.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to provide insight into consumer purchasing decisions by integrating eye-tracking data with forecasting techniques. First, the study investigates how consumption motives (hedonic vs. utilitarian) and purchasing purposes (for oneself vs. for others) influence visual attention and decision-making processes. An experimental design was conducted with 128 participants in a simulated online shopping environment, where eye-tracking data were collected based on fixation counts and durations across defined Areas of Interest (AOIs). Second, a total of 20 input features were collected, comprising fixation counts and fixation durations for 10 review-related Areas of Interest (AOIs), and these features were evaluated across the experimental scenarios, while the binary output variable represented the participant's purchase decision. These biometric features, together with scenario information, were used to forecast purchasing decisions using six machine-learning methods, including Artificial Neural Networks, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, K-Nearest Neighbors, Naive Bayes, and Logistic Regression. The results indicate that consumers' visual attention aligns with their consumption motives and purchasing purposes, revealing distinct gaze patterns across different scenarios. In the forecasting phase, the accuracy of different methods for predicting purchasing decisions using review-related eye-tracking data is evaluated. Support Vector Machines achieved the highest overall accuracy, approximately 59-60% across the evaluated datasets, compared with a validation-specific majority-class baseline of 53.85%. This corresponds to a modest improvement of approximately 5.15-6.15 percentage points over the naive benchmark. Overall, the findings suggest that objectively recorded review-related eye-tracking data can be operationalized as behavioral input features in a machine-learning-based purchase-decision classification framework, highlighting the methodological value of integrating eye-tracking insights with consumer behavior forecasting.
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.