Examining Visual Attention to Tobacco Marketing Materials Among Young Adult Smokers: Protocol for a Remote Webcam-Based Eye-Tracking Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eye tracking provides an objective way to measure attention, which can advance researchers' and policy makers' understanding of tobacco marketing influences. The development of remote webcam-based eye-tracking technology, integrated with web-based crowdsourcing studies, may be a cost-effective and time-efficient alternative to laboratory-based eye-tracking methods. However, research is needed to evaluate the utility of remote eye-tracking methods. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to detail the process of designing a remote webcam-based eye-tracking experiment and provide data on associations between participant characteristics and the outcomes of experiment completion. METHODS: A total of 2023 young adult (aged 18-34 years) cigarette smokers in the United States were recruited to complete a web-based survey that included a 90-second remote eye-tracking experiment that examined attention to e-cigarette marketing materials. Primary outcome measures assessed the completion of the remote eye-tracking experiment-specifically, experiment initiated versus not initiated, experiment completed versus not completed, and usable versus nonusable eye-tracking data generated. Multivariable logistic regressions examined the associations between outcome measures and participants' sociodemographic backgrounds, tobacco use history, and electronic devices (mobile vs desktop) used during the experiment. RESULTS: Study recruitment began on April 14, 2022, and ended on May 3, 2022. Of the 2023 survey participants, 1887 (93.28%) initiated the experiment, and 777 (38.41%) completed the experiment. Of the 777 participants who completed the experiment, 381 (49%) generated usable data. Results from the full regression models show that non-Hispanic Black participants (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.91) were less likely to complete the eye-tracking experiment than non-Hispanic White participants. In addition, female (vs male) participants (AOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01-2.11), those currently using (vs not using) e-cigarettes (AOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.13-3.82), and those who used mobile (vs desktop) devices (AOR 5.10, 95% CI 3.05-8.52) were more likely to generate usable eye-tracking data. CONCLUSIONS: Young adult participants were willing to try remote eye-tracking technology, and nearly half of those who completed the experiment generated usable eye-tracking data (381/777, 49%). Thus, we believe that the use of remote eye-tracking tools, integrated with crowdsourcing recruitment, can be a useful approach for the tobacco regulatory science research community to collect high-quality, large-scale eye-tracking data in a timely fashion and thereby address research questions related to the ever-evolving tobacco marketing landscape. It would be useful to investigate techniques to enhance completion rates and data usability. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/43512.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.013 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".