pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.02898 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-27 · 💻 cs.HC

What Shapes Participant Data Quality? A Scoping Review and Case Study of Crowdsourced Webcam Eye Tracking in AI Interviews

Ka Hei Carrie Lau , Enkelejda Kasneci This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 22:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords crowdsourced eye trackingwebcam eye trackingdata qualityRealEye platformordered logistic regressionAI interviewsscoping reviewHCI
0
0 comments X

The pith

In crowdsourced webcam eye tracking, higher fixation counts, shorter sessions, and operating system choice predict significantly higher data quality grades within the RealEye platform.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reviews crowdsourced eye-tracking studies from 2011 to 2025 and identifies fragmented reporting practices along with an absence of standard quality benchmarks. It then presents a case study of 205 participants completing AI fairness interviews via the RealEye webcam platform, where ordered logistic regression links specific behavioral and technical variables to the platform's quality grades. Higher numbers of fixations, briefer overall session times, and particular operating systems emerge as reliable predictors of better grades. A sympathetic reader would value this because inconsistent data quality currently limits the scalability and trustworthiness of remote eye-tracking methods in HCI and behavioral research.

Core claim

Within the RealEye platform, ordered logistic regression applied to the proprietary quality metric shows that higher fixation counts, shorter session durations, and operating system choice produce significantly higher quality grades in a sample of 205 crowdsourced AI interview participants.

What carries the argument

Ordered logistic regression on the RealEye platform's quality metric, treating behavioral signals (fixation count, session length) and technical signals (operating system) as predictors of an ordinal quality outcome.

If this is right

  • Recruitment and screening protocols can target participants expected to produce higher fixation counts and shorter sessions to raise overall data quality.
  • Reporting of fixation counts, session durations, and operating systems should become standard in future crowdsourced eye-tracking papers to improve replicability.
  • Platform-specific quality models can be built to filter or weight participant data before analysis.
  • Actionable guidelines for session design can reduce the rate of low-quality recordings in remote behavioral studies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the same predictors hold on other platforms, they could form the basis of platform-agnostic best practices for remote eye tracking.
  • Adding operating-system checks during participant onboarding might reduce data attrition without extra hardware requirements.
  • The approach could transfer to other forms of remote behavioral sensing where quality metrics are proprietary and participant behavior varies.

Load-bearing premise

The RealEye platform's proprietary quality metric is a valid and unbiased measure of actual data quality that generalizes beyond this specific sample and platform.

What would settle it

Re-running the same ordered logistic regression on eye-tracking data from a different webcam platform or a new sample of at least 200 participants and finding no significant association between fixation counts, session length, or operating system and an independent quality measure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.02898 by Enkelejda Kasneci, Ka Hei Carrie Lau.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of our approach to evaluating participant data quality in crowdsourced webcam-based eye [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of the scoping review process. (a) Number of publications returned by the query. After [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Experimental procedure from recruitment to AI inter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Associations between key predictors and participant quality grade. (a) Fixation count by quality grade. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Webcam-based eye tracking is a cost-effective, scalable method for remote research that effectively reaches broader populations. However, uncontrolled environments and hardware diversity lead to inconsistent data quality in crowdsourcing. To assess current practices, we conducted a scoping review of crowdsourced eye-tracking from 2011-2025. The review confirms fragmented reporting and a lack of established quality benchmarks. To address this lack of predictive insight, we conducted a case study on AI fairness interviews (N=205) using the RealEye platform. Applying Ordered Logistic Regression (OLR) to the platform quality metric, we found that behavioral and technical factors significantly predict data quality. Specifically, within the RealEye platform, higher fixation counts, shorter sessions, and operating system choice yield significantly higher quality grades. Based on this review and platform-specific predictive insights, we provide actionable recommendations to enhance the reliability, transparency, and replicability of future crowdsourced webcam eye tracking in HCI and behavioral science.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper conducts a scoping review of crowdsourced webcam eye-tracking studies published 2011-2025, documenting fragmented reporting practices and the absence of standardized quality benchmarks. It then reports a case study of N=205 participants completing AI fairness interviews via the RealEye platform, applying ordered logistic regression to the platform's internal quality metric and claiming that higher fixation counts, shorter sessions, and operating-system choice significantly predict higher quality grades. Actionable recommendations for improving reliability and transparency in future HCI and behavioral-science studies are offered.

Significance. If the regression results prove robust and the quality metric is shown to be independent of the predictors, the work could help researchers using commercial webcam trackers improve data quality through simple behavioral and technical controls. The scoping review usefully flags the lack of benchmarks in the literature. However, without external validation of the outcome variable or model diagnostics, the practical significance remains limited to the specific RealEye context.

major comments (3)
  1. Case study / OLR analysis: the manuscript states that ordered logistic regression was applied and reports significant predictors, yet supplies no model specification, coefficient estimates, standard errors, p-values, pseudo-R², or assumption checks. Without these details it is impossible to assess whether the data support the claims that fixation count, session duration, and OS choice predict quality grades.
  2. Case study / quality metric: the outcome variable is the RealEye platform's proprietary quality grade, but the paper provides no description of how this ordinal metric is computed. If the grade incorporates fixation counts, session length, or OS signals (common in commercial trackers), the reported associations are at risk of being definitional rather than empirical; no external anchor (manual gaze validation, stimulus-driven accuracy check, or comparison to open-source trackers) is supplied to confirm the metric measures true data quality.
  3. Generalizability: the N=205 AI-interview sample is drawn from a single platform and task; the manuscript does not test or discuss whether the identified predictors hold for other crowdsourced eye-tracking paradigms, stimuli, or open-source implementations.
minor comments (2)
  1. Scoping review section: the search strategy, databases, exact inclusion/exclusion criteria, and PRISMA-style flow diagram are not detailed enough to permit replication of the review.
  2. Abstract and results: effect sizes or odds ratios for the significant predictors are not reported, only the direction of the associations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments, which help strengthen the manuscript. We address each major point below and will revise the paper accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Case study / OLR analysis: the manuscript states that ordered logistic regression was applied and reports significant predictors, yet supplies no model specification, coefficient estimates, standard errors, p-values, pseudo-R², or assumption checks. Without these details it is impossible to assess whether the data support the claims that fixation count, session duration, and OS choice predict quality grades.

    Authors: We agree that the current version lacks these essential statistical details. In the revised manuscript we will include the full ordered logistic regression specification, all coefficient estimates with standard errors and p-values, the pseudo-R², and checks for the proportional odds assumption. This addition will allow readers to evaluate the robustness of the reported associations directly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Case study / quality metric: the outcome variable is the RealEye platform's proprietary quality grade, but the paper provides no description of how this ordinal metric is computed. If the grade incorporates fixation counts, session length, or OS signals (common in commercial trackers), the reported associations are at risk of being definitional rather than empirical; no external anchor (manual gaze validation, stimulus-driven accuracy check, or comparison to open-source trackers) is supplied to confirm the metric measures true data quality.

    Authors: We acknowledge the concern. The RealEye quality grade is proprietary, so a complete algorithmic description cannot be provided. In revision we will add all publicly available information from RealEye documentation on the metric's construction and will explicitly discuss the possibility of overlap with our predictors as a limitation. We did not collect external validation data (e.g., manual coding or open-source comparisons) in this study; we will add this as a clear limitation and recommend such validation for future work. revision: partial

  3. Referee: Generalizability: the N=205 AI-interview sample is drawn from a single platform and task; the manuscript does not test or discuss whether the identified predictors hold for other crowdsourced eye-tracking paradigms, stimuli, or open-source implementations.

    Authors: We accept this limitation. The case study is confined to the RealEye platform and the specific AI fairness interview task. In the revised discussion we will expand the caveats regarding generalizability, clarify that the predictors are platform- and task-specific, and outline concrete directions for future studies to examine these factors across other platforms, stimuli, and open-source tools. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical OLR on external platform metric yields independent associations

full rationale

The paper's central case-study claim rests on applying ordered logistic regression to the RealEye platform's pre-existing quality metric as the ordinal outcome variable, then reporting associations with fixation counts, session duration, and OS choice. No equation, definition, or self-citation in the provided text shows that the platform metric is constructed from those same behavioral predictors; the regression is therefore a standard empirical fit rather than a definitional tautology. The scoping review component is purely descriptive and introduces no derived quantities. Because the analysis treats the platform grade as an independent input and produces statistical associations rather than recovering its own inputs by construction, the derivation chain remains self-contained and non-circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the unvalidated assumption that the RealEye quality metric is a reliable dependent variable and that the regression coefficients fitted to the 205-participant sample capture generalizable relationships.

free parameters (1)
  • Ordered logistic regression coefficients
    Model parameters estimated from the N=205 dataset to predict ordinal quality grades.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption RealEye platform quality grades constitute a valid ordinal measure of data quality
    The regression treats these grades as ground truth without external validation.
  • domain assumption The 205 AI interview participants are representative of typical crowdsourced webcam eye tracking users
    Generalization beyond this specific task and platform is assumed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5474 in / 1320 out tokens · 58350 ms · 2026-05-14T22:24:11.367873+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1007/s10055-022-00738-z Parviz Asghari, Maike Schindler, and Achim J Lilienthal

    Eye Tracking in Virtual Reality: a Broad Review of Applications and Challenges.Virtual Reality27, 2 (01 Jun 2023), 1481–1505. doi:10.1007/s10055-022-00738-z Parviz Asghari, Maike Schindler, and Achim J Lilienthal

    work page doi:10.1007/s10055-022-00738-z 2023

  2. [2]

    Jennifer K Bertrand and Craig S Chapman

    Comparing online webcam-and laboratory-based eye-tracking for the assessment of infants’ audio-visual synchrony perception.Frontiers in psychology12 (2022), 733933. Jennifer K Bertrand and Craig S Chapman

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Hamburg, Germany)(CHI ’23)

    Dynamics of eye-hand coordination are flexibly preserved in eye-cursor coordination during an online, digital, object interaction task. InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Hamburg, Germany)(CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 517, 13 pages. doi:10.1145/3544548.3580866 Jennife...

    work page doi:10.1145/3544548.3580866 2023

  4. [4]

    Webcam eye-tracking reveals early decision processing

    Continuous Measures of Decision-Difficulty Captured Remotely: II. Webcam eye-tracking reveals early decision processing. arXiv:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2023/06/07/2023.06.06.543799.full.pdf doi:10.1101/2023.06.06.543799 Tanja Blascheck, Kuno Kurzhals, Michael Raschke, Michael Burch, Daniel Weiskopf, and Thomas Ertl

    work page doi:10.1101/2023.06.06.543799 2023

  5. [5]

    Efe Bozkir, Süleyman Özdel, Mengdi Wang, Brendan David-John, Hong Gao, Kevin Butler, Eakta Jain, and Enkelejda Kasneci

    Investigating the suitability of online eye tracking for psychological research: Evidence from comparisons with in-person data using emotion–attention interaction tasks.Behavior Research Methods56, 3 (2024), 2213–2226. Efe Bozkir, Süleyman Özdel, Mengdi Wang, Brendan David-John, Hong Gao, Kevin Butler, Eakta Jain, and Enkelejda Kasneci

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    IEEE113, 10 (2025), 1155–1191

    Eye-Tracked Virtual Reality: A Comprehensive Survey on Methods and Privacy Challenges.Proc. IEEE113, 10 (2025), 1155–1191. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2026.3653661 Stephanie Brandl, Oliver Eberle, Tiago Ribeiro, Anders Søgaard, and Nora Hollenstein

    work page doi:10.1109/jproc.2026.3653661 2025

  7. [7]

    ACM Hum.-Comput

    Teaching Eye Tracking: Challenges and Perspectives.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.8, ETRA, Article 237 (May 2024), 17 pages. doi:10.1145/3655611 Benjamin T. Carter and Steven G. Luke

    work page doi:10.1145/3655611 2024

  8. [8]

    Best practices in eye tracking research.International Journal of Psychophysiology 155 (2020), 49–62. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2020.05.010 Julia Chen-Sankey, Maryam Elhabashy, Stefanie Gratale, Jason Geller, Melissa Mercincavage, Andrew A Strasser, Cristine D Delnevo, Michelle Jeong, Olivia A Wackowski, et al

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2020.05.010 2020

  9. [9]

    Hilary O Edughele, Yinghui Zhang, Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki, Quoc-Tuan Vien, Haley Morris-Cafiero, and Michael Opoku Agyeman

    Examining visual attention to tobacco marketing materials among young adult smokers: Protocol for a remote webcam-based eye-tracking experiment.JMIR Research Protocols12, 1 (2023), e43512. Hilary O Edughele, Yinghui Zhang, Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki, Quoc-Tuan Vien, Haley Morris-Cafiero, and Michael Opoku Agyeman

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Nathan Gagné and Léon Franzen

    Eye-tracking assistive technologies for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.IEEE Access10 (2022), 41952–41972. Nathan Gagné and Léon Franzen

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Robert W Hammond and Yuqi Wang

    How to run behavioural experiments online: Best practice suggestions for cognitive psychology and neuroscience.Swiss Psychology Open: the official journal of the Swiss Psychological Society3, 1 (2023). Robert W Hammond and Yuqi Wang

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Alba Haveriku, Hakik Paci, Nelda Kote, Paola Shasivari, and Elinda Kajo Meçe

    Crowdsourced Online Biometric Studies: Is the juice worth the squeeze?Muma Business Review7 (2023), 141–148. Alba Haveriku, Hakik Paci, Nelda Kote, Paola Shasivari, and Elinda Kajo Meçe

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Melanie Heck, Christian Becker, and Viola Deutscher

    A systematic review of eye-tracking data in NLP: exploring low-cost and cross-lingual possibilities.International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing16, 1 (2025), 29–40. Melanie Heck, Christian Becker, and Viola Deutscher

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    InProceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’23)

    Webcam Eye Tracking for Desktop and Mobile Devices: A Systematic Review. InProceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’23). University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–10. doi:10.24251/HICSS.2023.825 Kenneth Holmqvist, Marcus Nyström, and Fiona Mulvey

    work page doi:10.24251/hicss.2023.825 2023

  15. [15]

    InProceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Santa Barbara, California)(ETRA ’12)

    Eye tracker data quality: what it is and how to measure it. InProceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Santa Barbara, California)(ETRA ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 45–52. doi:10.1145/2168556.2168563 Michael Xuelin Huang, Jiajia Li, Grace Ngai, and Hong Va Leong

    work page doi:10.1145/2168556.2168563

  16. [16]

    Ariel N James, Rachel Ryskin, Joshua K Hartshorne, Haylee Backs, Nandeeta Bala, Laila Barcenas-Meade, Samata Bhattarai, Tessa Charles, Gerasimos Copoulos, Claire Coss, et al

    Quick bootstrapping of a personalized gaze model from real-use interactions.ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST)9, 4 (2018), 1–25. Ariel N James, Rachel Ryskin, Joshua K Hartshorne, Haylee Backs, Nandeeta Bala, Laila Barcenas-Meade, Samata Bhattarai, Tessa Charles, Gerasimos Copoulos, Claire Coss, et al

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    Gustavo E Juantorena, Francisco Figari, Agustín Petroni, and Juan E Kamienkowski

    What Paradigms Can Webcam Eye-Tracking Be Used For? Attempted Replications of Five Cognitive Science Experiments.Collabra: Psychology11, 1 (2025), 140755. Gustavo E Juantorena, Francisco Figari, Agustín Petroni, and Juan E Kamienkowski

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    2023–07 pages

    Web-based eye-tracking for remote cognitive assessments: The anti-saccade task as a case study. 2023–07 pages. doi:10.1101/2023.07.11.548447 Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 10, No. 3, Article ETRA003. Publication date: May

    work page doi:10.1101/2023.07.11.548447 2023

  19. [19]

    Margaret Kandel and Jesse Snedeker

    Webcam eye tracking close to laboratory standards: Comparing a new webcam-based system and the EyeLink 1000.Behavior research methods56, 5 (2024), 5002–5022. Margaret Kandel and Jesse Snedeker

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Enkelejda Kasneci, Gjergji Kasneci, Thomas C

    Assessing two methods of webcam-based eye-tracking for child language research.Journal of Child Language52, 3 (2025), 675–708. Enkelejda Kasneci, Gjergji Kasneci, Thomas C. Kübler, and Wolfgang Rosenstiel

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    InProceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Safety Harbor, Florida)(ETRA ’14)

    The applicability of probabilistic methods to the online recognition of fixations and saccades in dynamic scenes. InProceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Safety Harbor, Florida)(ETRA ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 323–326. doi:10.1145/2578153.2578213 Anastasia Katsaounidou, Paris Xylogiannis,...

    work page doi:10.1145/2578153.2578213

  22. [22]

    Christina Katsini, Yasmeen Abdrabou, George E

    An AI-Driven News Impact Monitoring Framework Through Attention Tracking.Societies15, 8 (2025). Christina Katsini, Yasmeen Abdrabou, George E. Raptis, Mohamed Khamis, and Florian Alt

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20)

    The Role of Eye Gaze in Security and Privacy Applications: Survey and Future HCI Research Directions. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–21. doi:10.1145/3313831.3376840 Nam Wook Kim, Zoya Bylinskii, Michelle A Borkin, Krzyszto...

    work page doi:10.1145/3313831.3376840 2020

  24. [24]

    Ka Hei Carrie Lau, Philipp Stark, Efe Bozkir, and Enkelejda Kasneci

    Bubbleview: an interface for crowdsourcing image importance maps and tracking visual attention.ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)24, 5 (2017), 1–40. Ka Hei Carrie Lau, Philipp Stark, Efe Bozkir, and Enkelejda Kasneci

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    InProceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Barcelona, Spain)(CHI ’26)

    Skin-Deep Bias: How Avatar Appearances Shape Perceptions of AI Hiring. InProceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Barcelona, Spain)(CHI ’26). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. doi:10.1145/3772318.3790379 To appear. Yaxiong Lei, Shijing He, Mohamed Khamis, and Juan Ye

    work page doi:10.1145/3772318.3790379 2026

  26. [26]

    Surveys56, 2 (2023), 1–38

    An end-to-end review of gaze estimation and its interactive applications on handheld mobile devices.Comput. Surveys56, 2 (2023), 1–38. Felix Morger, Stephanie Brandl, Lisa Beinborn, and Nora Hollenstein

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    InProceedings of the 2022 CLASP Conference on (Dis)embodiment, Simon Dobnik, Julian Grove, and Asad Sayeed (Eds.)

    A Cross-lingual Comparison of Human and Model Relative Word Importance. InProceedings of the 2022 CLASP Conference on (Dis)embodiment, Simon Dobnik, Julian Grove, and Asad Sayeed (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Gothenburg, Sweden, 11–23. https: //aclanthology.org/2022.clasp-1.2/ Anelise Newman, Barry McNamara, Camilo Fosco, Yun Bin Zhan...

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20)

    TurkEyes: A Web-Based Toolbox for Crowdsourcing Attention Data. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. doi:10.1145/3313831.3376799 Mohammad Othman, Telmo Amaral, Róisín McNaney, Jan D. Smeddinck, John Vines, and Patrick Olivier

    work page doi:10.1145/3313831.3376799 2020

  29. [29]

    InProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services(Vienna, Austria)(MobileHCI ’17)

    CrowdEyes: crowdsourcing for robust real-world mobile eye tracking. InProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services(Vienna, Austria)(MobileHCI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 18, 13 pages. doi:10.1145/3098279.3098559 Soumya Panja, Sapta Rathi Roy, Shat...

    work page doi:10.1145/3098279.3098559

  30. [30]

    InProceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval(Oslo, Norway) (CHIIR ’17)

    SearchGazer: Webcam Eye Tracking for Remote Studies of Web Search. InProceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval(Oslo, Norway) (CHIIR ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17–26. doi:10.1145/3020165.3020170 Alexandra Papoutsaki, Patsorn Sangkloy, James Laskey, Nediyana Daskalova, Jef...

    work page doi:10.1145/3020165.3020170 2017

  31. [31]

    Alexander Plopski, Teresa Hirzle, Nahal Norouzi, Long Qian, Gerd Bruder, and Tobias Langlotz

    Methodological recommendations for webcam-based eye tracking: A scoping review.Research Methods in Applied Linguistics4, 3 (2025), 100244. Alexander Plopski, Teresa Hirzle, Nahal Norouzi, Long Qian, Gerd Bruder, and Tobias Langlotz

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Surv.55, 3, Article 53 (March 2022), 39 pages

    The Eye in Extended Reality: A Survey on Gaze Interaction and Eye Tracking in Head-worn Extended Reality.ACM Comput. Surv.55, 3, Article 53 (March 2022), 39 pages. doi:10.1145/3491207 Prolific. 2026a. How Much Should You Pay Research Participants? https://www.prolific.com/resources/how-much-should- you-pay-research-participants. Accessed: 11 February

    work page doi:10.1145/3491207 2022

  33. [33]

    Online eye tracking and real-time sentence processing: On opportunities and efficacy for capturing psycholinguistic effects of different magnitudes and diversity.Behavior Research Methods56, 4 (2024), 3504–3522. RealEye. 2024.RealEye White Paper. Technical Report. RealEye. Available upon request from https://www.realeye.io/lp/ whitepaper. RealEye. 2025a. ...

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    arXiv:2303.17876 [cs.CL] Fatemeh Sarvi, Mohammad Aliannejadi, Sebastian Schelter, and Maarten de Rijke

    WebQAmGaze: A Multilingual Webcam Eye-Tracking-While-Reading Dataset. arXiv:2303.17876 [cs.CL] Fatemeh Sarvi, Mohammad Aliannejadi, Sebastian Schelter, and Maarten de Rijke

    work page arXiv

  35. [35]

    In2022 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Seattle, WA, USA)(ETRA ’22)

    Towards efficient calibration for webcam eye-tracking in online experiments. In2022 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications(Seattle, WA, USA)(ETRA ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 27, 7 pages. doi:10.1145/3517031.3529645 Kilian Semmelmann and Sarah Weigelt

    work page doi:10.1145/3517031.3529645

  36. [36]

    Sahand Shaghaghi, Karissa B

    Online webcam-based eye tracking in cognitive science: A first look.Behavior Research Methods50, 2 (2018), 451–465. Sahand Shaghaghi, Karissa B. Payne, Bryan Tripp, Kerstin Dautenhahn, and Chrystopher L. Nehaniv

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3608621 Zohreh Sharafi, Bonita Sharif, Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc, Andrew Begel, Roman Bednarik, and Martha Crosby

    FocalVid: A Platform for Tracking Visual Attention to Video via Crowdsourcing Validated Against Human Gaze Data.IEEE Access13 (2025), 159566–159581. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3608621 Zohreh Sharafi, Bonita Sharif, Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc, Andrew Begel, Roman Bednarik, and Martha Crosby

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2025.3608621 2025

  38. [38]

    Ibrahim Shehi Shehu, Yafei Wang, Athuman Mohamed Athuman, and Xianping Fu

    A practical guide on conducting eye tracking studies in software engineering.Empirical Software Engineering25, 5 (2020), 3128–3174. Ibrahim Shehi Shehu, Yafei Wang, Athuman Mohamed Athuman, and Xianping Fu

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Remote eye gaze tracking research: A comparative evaluation on past and recent progress.Electronics10, 24 (2021),

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    InProceedings of the 25th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction(Paris, France)(ICMI ’23)

    Do I Have Your Attention: A Large Scale Engagement Prediction Dataset and Baselines. InProceedings of the 25th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction(Paris, France)(ICMI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 174–182. doi:10.1145/3577190.3614164 Mieke Sarah Slim and Robert J Hartsuiker

    work page doi:10.1145/3577190.3614164

  41. [41]

    js.Behavior Research Methods55, 7 (2023), 3786–3804

    Moving visual world experiments online? A web-based replication of Dijkgraaf, Hartsuiker, and Duyck (2017) using PCIbex and WebGazer. js.Behavior Research Methods55, 7 (2023), 3786–3804. Elizabeth Swanson, Michael C Frank, and Judith Degen

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    Language Development Research4, 1 (2024), 1–41

    Syntactic adaptation and word learning in children and adults. Language Development Research4, 1 (2024), 1–41. Enkelejda Tafaj, Thomas C. Kübler, Gjergji Kasneci, Wolfgang Rosenstiel, and Martin Bogdan

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    InArtificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2013, Valeri Mladenov, Petia Koprinkova-Hristova, Günther Palm, Alessandro E

    Online Classification of Eye Tracking Data for Automated Analysis of Traffic Hazard Perception. InArtificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2013, Valeri Mladenov, Petia Koprinkova-Hristova, Günther Palm, Alessandro E. P. Villa, Bruno Appollini, and Nikola Kasabov (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 442–450. Eva Thilderkvi...

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107502 Kim L Uittenhove, Stephanie Jeanneret, and Evie Vergauwe

    On current limitations of online eye-tracking to study the visual processing of source code.Information and Software Technology174 (2024), 107502. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107502 Kim L Uittenhove, Stephanie Jeanneret, and Evie Vergauwe

    work page doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107502 2024

  45. [45]

    doi:10.31234/osf.io/uy4kb Ine Van der Cruyssen, Gershon Ben-Shakhar, Yoni Pertzov, Nitzan Guy, Quinn Cabooter, Lukas J Gunschera, and Bruno Verschuere

    From Lab-Testing to Web-Testing in Cognitive Research: Who You Test is More Important Than How You Test. doi:10.31234/osf.io/uy4kb Ine Van der Cruyssen, Gershon Ben-Shakhar, Yoni Pertzov, Nitzan Guy, Quinn Cabooter, Lukas J Gunschera, and Bruno Verschuere

    work page doi:10.31234/osf.io/uy4kb

  46. [46]

    Myrte Vos, Serge Minor, and Gillian Ramchand

    The validation of online webcam-based eye-tracking: The replication of the cascade effect, the novelty preference, and the visual world paradigm.Behavior Research Methods56, 5 (2024), 4836–4849. Myrte Vos, Serge Minor, and Gillian Ramchand

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    doi:10.31234/osf.io/36skd Tobias Wagner, Mark Colley, Daniel Breckel, Michael Kösel, and Enrico Rukzio

    Comparing infrared and webcam eye tracking in the Visual World Paradigm. doi:10.31234/osf.io/36skd Tobias Wagner, Mark Colley, Daniel Breckel, Michael Kösel, and Enrico Rukzio

    work page doi:10.31234/osf.io/36skd

  48. [48]

    InProceedings of Mensch Und Computer 2024 (Karlsruhe, Germany)(MuC ’24)

    UnitEye: Introducing a User-Friendly Plugin to Democratize Eye Tracking Technology in Unity Environments. InProceedings of Mensch Und Computer 2024 (Karlsruhe, Germany)(MuC ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–10. doi:10.1145/3670653. 3670655 Ricky S Wong

    work page doi:10.1145/3670653 2024

  49. [49]

    Pingmei Xu, Krista A Ehinger, Yinda Zhang, Adam Finkelstein, Sanjeev R Kulkarni, and Jianxiong Xiao

    An experimental investigation of attribute framing effects on risky sourcing behaviour: the mediating role of attention allocated to suppliers’ quality information.International Journal of Operations & Production Management 43, 13 (2023), 205–225. Pingmei Xu, Krista A Ehinger, Yinda Zhang, Adam Finkelstein, Sanjeev R Kulkarni, and Jianxiong Xiao

    work page 2023

  50. [50]

    Cansu Yuksel Elgin and Ceyhun Elgin

    Webcam-based online eye-tracking for behavioral research.Judgment and Decision making16, 6 (2021), 1485–1505. Cansu Yuksel Elgin and Ceyhun Elgin

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    Visual Attention to Economic Information in Simulated Ophthalmic Deficits: A Remote Eye-Tracking Study.Journal of Eye Movement Research18, 5 (2025),

    work page 2025

  52. [52]

    arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 doi:10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 Proc

    Ethnic discrimination in hiring decisions: a meta-analysis of correspondence tests 1990–2015.Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies42, 7 (2016), 1115–1134. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 doi:10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 10, No. 3, Article ETRA003. Publication date: May

    work page doi:10.1080/1369183x.2015.1133279 1990

  53. [53]

    CategoryChecklist Item Participant Setup •Confirm webcam and browser compatibility before participation

    Checklist for conducting crowdsourced webcam-based eye-tracking studies. CategoryChecklist Item Participant Setup •Confirm webcam and browser compatibility before participation. •Provide clear setup instructions (lighting, posture, viewing distance). •Inform participants about data use and privacy. •Verify calibration readiness and camera permissions. •Sc...

    work page 2013