Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42421703›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Integrating eye-tracking into psychometric research: computational approaches to explore response burden in questionnaire completion.

Monica Casella, Francesca Borghesi, Elena Lupi, Pietro Cipresso, Davide Marocco

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Monica CasellaNatural and Artificial Cognition Laboratory "Orazio Miglino", Department of Humanistic Studies, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Francesca BorghesiDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Elena LupiNatural and Artificial Cognition Laboratory "Orazio Miglino", Department of Humanistic Studies, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Pietro CipressoDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Davide MaroccoNatural and Artificial Cognition Laboratory "Orazio Miglino", Department of Humanistic Studies, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Long questionnaires can increase cognitive and motivational demands, causing response burden. This study investigates whether eye-movement behavior varies with instrument length. Methods: Twenty-five participants completed the BFI-44 and the longer BFQ-2 during gaze recording. Analysis included a 2 x 3 repeated-measures ANOVA (Test x Time) and the evaluation of seven machine-learning classifiers (including Random Forest and AdaBoost) trained on the final questionnaire segment. Results: Fixation, visit, glance, and pupil metrics decreased over time across both instruments. Significant Test x Time interactions revealed that the longer BFQ-2 produced more pronounced temporal variability in gaze behavior. The AdaBoost classifier achieved 73% accuracy in distinguishing between the two instruments. Discussion: Findings suggest that longer questionnaires elicit stronger temporal fluctuations in gaze, likely reflecting fatigue or strategic adaptation. Eye-tracking provides a valuable objective tool for assessing the stability of respondent engagement over time.

Indexed as

eye-trackingmachine learningpsychometricsresponse burdenself-reports

Identifiers

PMID42421703
PMCPMC13342057

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.