MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411203459 · doi:10.1002/wcs.70008

The Use of Eye Gaze Data and Personality Traits: A Scoping Review of the Literature

2025· review· en· W4411203459 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazePsychologyBig Five personality traitsPersonalityEye trackingData scienceCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSocial psychologyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This scoping review examines the use of eye movement tracking in personality research across various domains, including job interviews, education and training, human-robot interaction, and user interface design. Eye-tracking has proven effective in capturing behavioral cues linked to personality traits such as emotional responses, leadership potential, and learning preferences. To map existing research and identify prevailing use case scenarios, a systematic search was conducted in the ACM and IEEE digital libraries. From an initial pool of 170 studies, 21 met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to full-text analysis. The purpose of this review is to provide a structured overview of current research trends, methodological approaches, and application contexts. Its contribution lies in synthesizing key insights and highlighting opportunities for future research, particularly in the use of eye-tracking for advancing personalized technologies and behavior-based analytics in fields such as education, marketing, and psychological analysis.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.226
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it