A Meta-Analysis on the Effect of Visual Attention on Choice

被引:33
作者
Bhatnagar, Roopali [1 ]
Orquin, Jacob L. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Aarhus Univ, Dept Management MAPP, Fuglesangs Alle 4, DK-8210 Aarhus V, Denmark
[2] Reykjavik Univ, Ctr Res Mkt & Consumer Psychol, Reykjavik, Iceland
关键词
visual attention; decision making; eye tracking; meta-analysis; SEQUENTIAL SAMPLING MODELS; DRIFT-DIFFUSION MODEL; DECISION-MAKING; EYE-MOVEMENTS; VALUE COMPUTATION; META-REGRESSION; GAZE BIAS; EXPOSURE; DYNAMICS; TRACKING;
D O I
10.1037/xge0001204
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Decision makers attend more to preferred choice options and to the ultimately chosen option, but does visual attention influence preferences and choice? Several theories suggest that attention has a causal effect on preferences and choice and a growing number of studies have examined the question with experimental methods. However, the evidence for an effect of attention on choice is mixed and highly contended. To advance the debate on the role of attention in decision making, we meta-analyze studies that manipulate attention-to-choice options and measure the effect on 2-alternative preferential choices. We identify 3 different methods for manipulating attention and find that studies manipulating total exposure time enhance choices the most, P = .541, 95% CI [.523, .560], p < .001, followed by studies controlling the location of the last fixation, P = .532, 95% CI [.518, .547], p < .001. Studies manipulating the location of the first fixation do not differ from chance level choice proportions, P = .507, 95% CI [0.497, 0.516], p = .18. The PET-PEESE analysis suggests a small degree of publication bias which results in a slight reduction of effect sizes. A meta-regression with absolute attention difference as predictor confirms the robustness of the findings. Our findings show the relevance of assuming an effect of attention on choice, but also indicate a need for further model development to account for the complete pattern of attention effects.
引用
收藏
页码:2265 / 2283
页数:19
相关论文
共 102 条
[51]   Exploiting the dynamics of eye gaze to bias intertemporal choice [J].
Liu, Hong-Zhi ;
Lyu, Xiao-Kang ;
Wei, Zi-Han ;
Mo, Wan-Li ;
Luo, Jiong-Rui ;
Su, Xiao-Yu .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2021, 34 (03) :419-431
[52]   The power of last fixation: Biasing simple choices by gaze-contingent manipulation [J].
Liu, Hong-Zhi ;
Zhou, Yan-Bang ;
Wei, Zi-Han ;
Jiang, Cheng-Ming .
ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 2020, 208
[53]   Neural correlates of evidence accumulation in a perceptual decision task [J].
Liu, Taosheng ;
Pleskac, Timothy J. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2011, 106 (05) :2383-2398
[54]   Relative visual saliency differences induce sizable bias in consumer choice [J].
Milosavljevic, Milica ;
Navalpakkam, Vidhya ;
Koch, Christof ;
Rangel, Antonio .
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 22 (01) :67-74
[55]  
Milosavljevic M, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P437
[56]   A Re-Examination of the Mere Exposure Effect: The Influence of Repeated Exposure on Recognition, Familiarity, and Liking [J].
Montoya, R. Matthew ;
Horton, Robert S. ;
Vevea, Jack L. ;
Citkowicz, Martyna ;
Lauber, Elissa A. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2017, 143 (05) :459-498
[57]   The effect of gaze-contingent stimulus elimination on preference judgments [J].
Morii, Masahiro ;
Sakagami, Takayuki .
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 6
[58]   Does Attention Increase the Value of Choice Alternatives? [J].
Mormann, Milica ;
Russo, J. Edward .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2021, 25 (04) :305-315
[59]   Perceptual But Not Complex Moral Judgments Can Be Biased by Exploiting the Dynamics of Eye-Gaze [J].
Newell, Ben R. ;
Le Pelley, Mike E. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2018, 147 (03) :409-417
[60]   GAZE SHIFTS DO NOT AFFECT PREFERENCE JUDGMENTS OF GRAPHIC PATTERNS [J].
Nittono, Hiroshi ;
Wada, Yuka .
PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 2009, 109 (01) :79-94