Content analysis reveals a monoculture in eye-tracking use, suggesting new avenues for communication research.
Eye tracking can advance communication research as the technology is increasingly embedded in everyday devices. However, its growing accessibility also raises a critical question: Do communication researchers use eye tracking in ways that expand or limit the field’s ability to ask new questions, refine its concepts and measures, and explain communication phenomena? We make 3 major points. First, we document an eye-tracking monoculture through content analysis of 61 articles drawn from a review of 34 communication journals over the past 35 years. We find that an overwhelming majority (67%) of articles use eye tracking in the same 3-part configuration of measuring attention alone, using eye-tracking measures to operationalize dependent-variable constructs, and relying on fixation-duration metrics. Second, this monoculture can limit the use of eye tracking in developing new constructs, explanations, and metrics. Third, we propose a diversification framework to move beyond this monoculture. The framework encourages researchers to ask: (a) What else can eye tracking study beyond attention? (b) What other roles can eye-tracking measures play beyond dependent variables? (c) What eye-movement metric could make the relevant process visible beyond fixation duration? The framework is a strategy for opening new lines of scientific inquiry that the monoculture is unlikely to generate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coronel et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: