pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.02899 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-28 · 💻 cs.HC

A Study of Consumers Cognitive Load in eCommerce Websites using Eye-tracking Technology

Shojibur Rahman , Ahmed Alif Swopno , Nayeem Ahmed , Ashik Ahmed Fahim , Tabin Hasan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 22:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords cognitive loadeye-trackinge-commerce websiteswebsite complexityproduct pricinguser perceptiononline shopping
0
0 comments X

The pith

Eye tracking shows that higher prices on similar products increase cognitive load in e-commerce sites.

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

This paper examines how product pricing affects users' cognitive load while shopping online. Researchers tracked the eye movements of 48 participants on popular e-commerce websites to measure fixation counts, saccades, durations, and task times. They found that similar products at different price points create varying levels of visual complexity. The study links this complexity directly to customer perceptions during purchases. These results suggest ways to design better online shopping interfaces.

Core claim

Using eye-tracking on 48 individuals viewing e-commerce sites, the research reveals that website complexity changes with the price of similar products, establishing a connection between visual complexity and customer perception in online buying decisions.

What carries the argument

Eye-tracking metrics including fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, and task completion time, applied to measure cognitive load from product price variations on webpages.

If this is right

  • Web developers can redesign pages to minimize complexity for high-priced items.
  • Business analysts gain tools to test how pricing influences user experience.
  • Improved designs may lead to higher customer satisfaction in online purchases.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Price information might be positioned or styled differently to manage load.
  • Similar methods could study other factors like product images or reviews.

Load-bearing premise

That the observed differences in eye movements are caused specifically by price differences rather than other aspects of the webpages or personal user variations.

What would settle it

Repeating the experiment with identical page layouts but altered prices showing no change in eye-tracking metrics would disprove the price-complexity link.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.02899 by Ahmed Alif Swopno, Ashik Ahmed Fahim, Nayeem Ahmed, Shojibur Rahman, Tabin Hasan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Survey Form [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Study Webpages Alexandre et al. [2] and Liqiong et al. [36] did in their stimuli process. Those websites were displayed in the gazerecoder slideshow in front of volunteers to perform the study. We showcased some skincare cosmetics on those web pages where the products were popular in the region. Moreover, we instructed users to select one product from each web page. The duration of choosing the product fro… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Detailed analysis of a heatmap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The average and standard deviation of Saccades [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The individual average of TCT, FD and FC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The aesthetics of e-commerce websites have a big influence on purchasing decisions and customers' satisfaction. Webpage complexity and high cognitive load are responsible for causing an unpleasant experience while shopping online. This research empirically inspects a correlation between users' cognitive load and product pricing, where price plays a vital role in causing web complexity. Therefore, we have experimented on 48 random individuals using eye-tracking technology to observe the eye movement calibration on some reputed e-commerce websites. We measured the cognitive load extracted from users' datasets by analyzing fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, and task completion time. Our study induces new findings on website complexity which varies on the similar product but different price ranges. This research also demonstrates a strong connection between customer perception and visual complexity while making online purchases. In addition, these findings will assist the developers and business analysts to improve consumers' shopping experience in e-commerce websites.

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

4 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports an eye-tracking study with 48 participants viewing similar products at different price points on reputed e-commerce sites. It measures cognitive load via four standard metrics (fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, task completion time) and claims that price differences induce measurable differences in visual complexity and cognitive load, with implications for website design.

Significance. If the price-complexity link could be isolated from confounds, the work would offer practical guidance for e-commerce UX. The current design, however, supplies no statistical support, no stimulus controls, and no raw data, so the central empirical claim remains unsupported.

major comments (4)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: the protocol provides no description of how similar products at different prices were selected or matched on layout, image count, text density, color contrast, or promotional elements; without such controls the observed metric differences cannot be attributed to price.
  2. [Results] Results section: no statistical tests, p-values, confidence intervals, or error bars are reported for any of the four eye-tracking metrics, leaving the claimed correlations without quantitative support.
  3. [Results] Results/Discussion: the analysis contains no regression controls or participant-level covariates for individual differences or page features, so the attribution of cognitive-load differences specifically to price remains untested.
  4. [Methods] Methods: exact websites, product categories, exclusion criteria, and data-availability statement are absent, preventing replication or assessment of generalizability.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrasing 'induces new findings on website complexity which varies on the similar product' is grammatically unclear and should be revised for precision.
  2. [Methods] The manuscript does not state whether the eye-tracking hardware and calibration procedure followed established standards (e.g., Tobii or EyeLink protocols).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

4 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback that identifies key gaps in methodological transparency and statistical rigor. We will revise the manuscript to address these points directly, adding the necessary details, analyses, and controls to strengthen the empirical claims while preserving the original study design and data.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: the protocol provides no description of how similar products at different prices were selected or matched on layout, image count, text density, color contrast, or promotional elements; without such controls the observed metric differences cannot be attributed to price.

    Authors: We agree that explicit matching criteria are required to isolate price effects. In the revised Methods, we will add a dedicated subsection describing the stimulus selection protocol: products were chosen from the same category and brand where possible, with manual matching on layout structure, image count (limited to 3-5 per page), text density (word count within 10%), color contrast ratios, and exclusion of promotional banners or discounts. Only price was systematically varied across low, medium, and high conditions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section: no statistical tests, p-values, confidence intervals, or error bars are reported for any of the four eye-tracking metrics, leaving the claimed correlations without quantitative support.

    Authors: We acknowledge the omission of inferential statistics. The revised Results section will report paired t-tests (or repeated-measures ANOVA where appropriate) for each metric across price conditions, accompanied by exact p-values, 95% confidence intervals, and error bars on all bar plots and tables to provide quantitative support for the observed differences in fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, and task completion time. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Results] Results/Discussion: the analysis contains no regression controls or participant-level covariates for individual differences or page features, so the attribution of cognitive-load differences specifically to price remains untested.

    Authors: We will add multiple linear regression models in the revised analysis that include price as the primary predictor while controlling for participant-level covariates (age, gender, self-reported online shopping frequency) and page-level features (total text length, image area). This will allow us to test whether price remains a significant predictor after accounting for these factors. revision: yes

  4. Referee: [Methods] Methods: exact websites, product categories, exclusion criteria, and data-availability statement are absent, preventing replication or assessment of generalizability.

    Authors: The revised Methods will explicitly state the websites (Amazon.in and Flipkart.com), product categories (smartphones and wireless earbuds), exclusion criteria (color blindness, uncorrected visual impairment, or prior exposure to the exact product pages), and include a data-availability statement that anonymized eye-tracking datasets and analysis scripts will be deposited in a public repository upon publication. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical eye-tracking measurements

full rationale

The paper reports an empirical experiment with 48 participants using eye-tracking hardware to record fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, and task completion time on e-commerce sites. No equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or self-citations appear in the provided text or abstract. Claims about price-related complexity rest on direct observational data rather than any reduction to prior inputs or self-referential definitions. This is a standard self-contained empirical study with no load-bearing circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the untested assumption that eye-movement metrics directly index cognitive load induced by price; no free parameters or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Fixation count, saccades, fixation duration, and task completion time are valid proxies for cognitive load in web browsing tasks.
    Invoked when interpreting eye data as cognitive load without additional validation or baseline comparison in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5465 in / 1145 out tokens · 31656 ms · 2026-05-14T22:02:02.404304+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

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Global E-Commerce Market 2021-2025,

    “Global E-Commerce Market 2021-2025,” Reportlinker.com. [Online]. Available: https://www.reportlinker.com/p04188481/Global-E- Commerce-Market.html. [Accessed: 18-Feb-2022]

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Visual complexity of websites: Effects on users’ experience, physiology, per- formance, and memory,

    A. N. Tuch, J. A. Bargas-Avila, K. Opwis, and F. H. Wilhelm, “Visual complexity of websites: Effects on users’ experience, physiology, per- formance, and memory,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., vol. 67, no. 9, pp. 703–715, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    The influence of home page complexity on consumer attention, attitudes, and purchase intent,

    G. L. Geissler, G. M. Zinkhan, and R. T. Watson, “The influence of home page complexity on consumer attention, attitudes, and purchase intent,” J. Advert., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 69–80, 2006

    work page 2006

  4. [4]

    Visual complexity of graphical user interfaces,

    A. Miniukovich, S. Sulpizio, and A. De Angeli, “Visual complexity of graphical user interfaces,” in Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Relationship between visual com- plexity and aesthetics of webpages,

    A. Miniukovich and M. Marchese, “Relationship between visual com- plexity and aesthetics of webpages,” in Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations,

    W. B. Dodds, K. B. Monroe, and D. Grewal, “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations,” J. Mark. Res., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 307–319, 1991

    work page 1991

  7. [7]

    Some consequences of the habit of judging quality by price,

    T. Scitovszky, “Some consequences of the habit of judging quality by price,” Rev. Econ. Stud., vol. 12, no. 2, p. 100, 1944

    work page 1944

  8. [8]

    Affect in Web Interfaces: A Study of the Impacts of Web Page Visual Complexity and Order,

    Deng, Liqiong, and Marshall Scott Poole. “Affect in Web Interfaces: A Study of the Impacts of Web Page Visual Complexity and Order,” MIS Quarterly vol. 34, no. 4 pp. 711–30, 2010

    work page 2010

  9. [9]

    Users’ emotional valence, arousal, and engagement based on perceived usability and aesthetics for web sites,

    K.-K. Seo, S. Lee, B. D. Chung, and C. Park, “Users’ emotional valence, arousal, and engagement based on perceived usability and aesthetics for web sites,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 72–87, 2015

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships,

    Y . Lee and K. A. Kozar, “Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships,” Decis. Support Syst., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 450–463, 2012

    work page 2012

  11. [11]

    The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process,

    L. Casal ´o, C. Flavi´an, and M. Guinal´ıu, “The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 325–345, 2008

    work page 2008

  12. [12]

    D. A. Norman, The design of everyday things. London, England: MIT Press, 2013

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Eye fixations and cognitive processes,

    M. A. Just and P. A. Carpenter, “Eye fixations and cognitive processes,” Cogn. Psychol., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 441–480, 1976

    work page 1976

  14. [14]

    Cognitive Load Theory,

    J. Sweller, “Cognitive Load Theory,” in Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Elsevier, 2011, pp. 37–76

    work page 2011

  15. [15]

    An eye-tracking study of website complexity from cognitive load perspective,

    Q. Wang, S. Yang, M. Liu, Z. Cao, and Q. Ma, “An eye-tracking study of website complexity from cognitive load perspective,” Decis. Support Syst., vol. 62, pp. 1–10, 2014

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    The role of visual complexity in affective reactions to webpages: Subjective, eye movement, and cardiovascular responses,

    A. Tuch, S. Kreibig, S. Roth, J. Bargas-Avila, K. Opwis, and F. Wilhelm, “The role of visual complexity in affective reactions to webpages: Subjective, eye movement, and cardiovascular responses,” IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 230–236, 2011

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    Online eye tracking,

    “Online eye tracking,” GazeRecorder, 03-May-2020. [Online]. Available: https://gazerecorder.com/. [Accessed: 04-Feb-2022]

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Measuring cognitive load using eye tracking technology in visual computing,

    J. Zagermann, U. Pfeil, and H. Reiterer, “Measuring cognitive load using eye tracking technology in visual computing,” in Proceedings of the Beyond Time and Errors on Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization - BELIV ’16, 2016

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review,

    R. Taylor, “Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review,” J. Diagn. Med. Sonogr., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 35–39, 1990

    work page 1990

  20. [20]

    Web commercials and advertising hierarchy-of-effects,

    G. C. Bruner II and A. Kumar, “Web commercials and advertising hierarchy-of-effects,” J. Advert. Res., vol. 40, no. 1–2, pp. 35–42, 2000

    work page 2000

  21. [21]

    An adaptable UI/UX considering user’s cognitive and behavior information in distributed environment,

    H. Ji, Y . Yun, S. Lee, K. Kim, and H. Lim, “An adaptable UI/UX considering user’s cognitive and behavior information in distributed environment,” Cluster Comput., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1045–1058, 2018

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Advanced responsive web framework based on MPEG-21,

    J. Moon, T.-B. Lim, K. W. Kim, S. P. Lee, and S. Lee, “Advanced responsive web framework based on MPEG-21,” in 2012 IEEE Second International Conference on Consumer Electronics - Berlin (ICCE- Berlin), 2012, pp. 197–199

    work page 2012

  23. [23]

    The impact of colour on Website appeal and users’ cognitive processes,

    N. Bonnardel, A. Piolat, and L. Le Bigot, “The impact of colour on Website appeal and users’ cognitive processes,” Displays, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 69–80, 2011

    work page 2011

  24. [24]

    An eye tracking study: Exploration customer behavior on web design,

    J. N. Sari, R. Ferdiana, P. I. Santosa, and L. E. Nugroho, “An eye tracking study: Exploration customer behavior on web design,” in Proceedings of the International HCI and UX Conference in Indonesia, 2015

    work page 2015

  25. [26]

    A Two factor theory for website design,

    S. D. O. Barcellos, P. Zhang, and R. V . Small, “A Two factor theory for website design,” vol. 6, p. 6026, 2000

    work page 2000

  26. [27]

    Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality,

    A. M. Aladwani and P. C. Palvia, “Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality,” Inf. manag., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 467–476, 2002

    work page 2002

  27. [28]

    Visual complexity and figure-background color contrast of E-commerce websites: Effects on consumers’ emotional responses,

    S.-W. Lin, L. Y .-S. Lo, and T. K. Huang, “Visual complexity and figure-background color contrast of E-commerce websites: Effects on consumers’ emotional responses,” in 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2016, pp. 3594–3603

    work page 2016

  28. [29]

    Cognitive load in eCommerce applications—measurement and effects on user satisfac- tion,

    P. Schmutz, S. Heinz, Y . M ´etrailler, and K. Opwis, “Cognitive load in eCommerce applications—measurement and effects on user satisfac- tion,” Adv. hum.-comput. interact., vol. 2009, pp. 1–9, 2009

    work page 2009

  29. [30]

    Comparing parallel and serial models: Theory and implementation,

    J. G. Snodgrass and J. T. Townsend, “Comparing parallel and serial models: Theory and implementation,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 330–354, 1980

    work page 1980

  30. [31]

    The effect of colors of e-commerce websites on consumer mood, memorization and buying intention,

    J.- ´E. Pelet and P. Papadopoulou, “The effect of colors of e-commerce websites on consumer mood, memorization and buying intention,” Eur. J. Inf. Syst., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 438–467, 2012

    work page 2012

  31. [32]

    Factors Affecting Consumers’ purchasing Decision through E-Commerce,

    T. T. Kidane and R. R. K. Sharma, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ purchasing Decision through E-Commerce,” Ieomsociety.org. [Online]. Available: http://ieomsociety.org/ieom 2016/pdfs/52.pdf. [Accessed: 17- Feb-2022]

    work page 2016

  32. [33]

    The relative importance of website design quality and service quality in determining consumers’ online repurchase behavior,

    T. Zhou, Y . Lu, and B. Wang, “The relative importance of website design quality and service quality in determining consumers’ online repurchase behavior,” Inf. Syst. Manag., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 327–337, 2009

    work page 2009

  33. [35]

    What is Webcam Eye Tracking?,

    “What is Webcam Eye Tracking?,” Sightcorp.com, 24-Oct-2020. [Online]. Available: https://sightcorp.com/knowledge-base/webcam-eye- tracking/. [Accessed: 17-Feb-2022]

    work page 2020

  34. [36]

    Aesthetic design of e-commerce web pages – Webpage Complexity, Order and preference,

    L. Deng and M. S. Poole, “Aesthetic design of e-commerce web pages – Webpage Complexity, Order and preference,” Electron. Commer. Res. Appl., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 420–440, 2012

    work page 2012

  35. [37]

    Serum TNF-U+03B1 and neurodegeneration in isolated REM sleep behavior disorder,

    R. Kim, J.-Y . Lee, H.-J. Kim, Y . K. Kim, H. Nam, and B. Jeon, “Serum TNF-U+03B1 and neurodegeneration in isolated REM sleep behavior disorder,” Parkinsonism Relat. Disord., vol. 81, pp. 1–7, 2020

    work page 2020

  36. [38]

    [Online]

    US consumer sentiment and behaviors during the coronavirus crisis,” Mckinsey.com, 21-Mar-2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our- insights/survey-us-consumer-sentiment-during-the-coronavirus-crisis. [Accessed: 17-Feb-2022]

    work page 2020

  37. [39]

    Web-store aesthetics in E-retailing: A conceptual framework and some theoretical implications,

    N. Tractinsky and O. Lowengart, “Web-store aesthetics in E-retailing: A conceptual framework and some theoretical implications,” Psu.edu. [Online]. Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download? doi=10.1.1.108.816&rep=rep1&type=pdf. [Accessed: 17-Feb-2022]

    work page 2022

  38. [40]

    Online consumer resilience during a pandemic: An exploratory study of e-commerce behavior before, during and after a COVID-19 lockdown,

    C. Guthrie, S. Fosso-Wamba, and J. B. Arnaud, “Online consumer resilience during a pandemic: An exploratory study of e-commerce behavior before, during and after a COVID-19 lockdown,” J. Retail. Consum. Serv., vol. 61, no. 102570, p. 102570, 2021

    work page 2021

  39. [41]

    Using visual design to improve customer perceptions of online assortments,

    B. E. Kahn, “Using visual design to improve customer perceptions of online assortments,” J. Retail., vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 29–42, 2017

    work page 2017

  40. [42]

    Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations,

    F. Flemisch, M. Heesen, T. Hesse, J. Kelsch, A. Schieben, and J. Beller, “Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations,” Cogn. Technol. Work, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 3–18, 2012

    work page 2012

  41. [43]

    Designing website attributes to induce experiential encounters,

    M.-H. Huang, “Designing website attributes to induce experiential encounters,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 425–442, 2003

    work page 2003

  42. [44]

    Which is more important in Internet shopping, perceived price or trust?,

    H.-W. Kim, Y . Xu, and S. Gupta, “Which is more important in Internet shopping, perceived price or trust?,” Electron. Commer. Res. Appl., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 241–252, 2012

    work page 2012

  43. [45]

    The expertise reversal effect,

    S. Kalyuga, P. Ayres, P. Chandler, and J. Sweller, “The expertise reversal effect,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 23–31, 2003

    work page 2003

  44. [46]

    Visual complexity and aesthetic perception of web pages,

    E. Michailidou, S. Harper, and S. Bechhofer, “Visual complexity and aesthetic perception of web pages,” in Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM international conference on Design of communication - SIGDOC ’08, 2008

    work page 2008

  45. [47]

    The interplay of online shopping motivations and experiential factors on personalized e-commerce: A complexity theory approach,

    I. O. Pappas, P. E. Kourouthanassis, M. N. Giannakos, and G. Lekakos, “The interplay of online shopping motivations and experiential factors on personalized e-commerce: A complexity theory approach,” Telemat. inform., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 730–742, 2017

    work page 2017

  46. [48]

    Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research,

    K. Rayner, “Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 124, no. 3, pp. 372–422, 1998

    work page 1998

  47. [49]

    Measurable decision making with GSR and pupillary analysis for intelligent user interface,

    J. Zhou et al., “Measurable decision making with GSR and pupillary analysis for intelligent user interface,” ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1–23, 2015

    work page 2015