Content uploaded by Rosy Boardman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rosy Boardman on Jun 01, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation:
Boardman, R., McCormick, H., Henninger, C.E. (2022). ‘Exploring Attention on a
Retailer’s Homepage: An Eye-Tracking & Qualitative Research Study’, Behaviour
and Information Technology DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2059396
Exploring Attention on a Retailer’s Homepage:
An Eye-Tracking & Qualitative Research Study
Dr Rosy Boardman
Department of Materials, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, UK
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8340-5438
Dr Helen McCormick
Manchester Fashion Institute, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7490-6014
Dr Claudia E. Henninger
Department of Materials, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, UK
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9978-5340
This work was supported by EPSRC Doctoral Training Award funding.
Disclosure of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Abstract
This article explores why some areas of a retailer’s homepage receive more attention than
others. An eye-tracking study followed by retrospective think-aloud protocols and qualitative
semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 52 females (aged 20-
70).
Findings revealed the visual hierarchy of a retail homepage: 1. Rotating Banner, 2. Main Menu
Bar, 3. Left drop-down menu, 4. Static images below banner, 5. Search bar. Qualitative data
revealed that some features attracted attention due to them being useful, serving a functional
purpose (menu bars, search bar), or due to them being interesting (static banner images) but
others did so inadvertently because they were distracting and irritating (rotating banner). This
shows that attention can be due to both positive and negative factors.
This article contributes to knowledge by providing a rich interpretation of eye-tracking data
and attention on a retail homepage, showing the interplay between top-down and bottom-up
attention on a user’s shopping journey. This is valuable for future academic research as well
as practitioners. This study also highlights the importance of using live websites for research
to increase ecological validity.
Key words: eye-tracking, qualitative, attention, website design, retail, homepage
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic encouraged more people to shop online, with global e-commerce
sales volumes for May 2021 46% higher compared to May 2019 (econsultancy, 2021). As
more people engage with digital interfaces daily, the need to understand how web design can
shape online behaviours is imperative (Goree et al., 2021). This research contributes to
knowledge by exploring users’ attention on a live retail homepage in order to provide a greater
understanding of what the attention on each of the design stimuli means and why some areas
are more salient than others.
This research is underpinned by the theory of visual hierarchy, which advocates that a user’s
viewing pattern is directed by two cognitive processes: searching (finding a point of entry to a
website) and scanning (the subsequent behaviour after the user has found that entry point)
(Djamasbi et al., 2011). The theory of visual hierarchy suggests that searching and scanning
behaviour can be affected by the visual and textual website design features (ibid), which
compete with one another for the user’s attention (Schall, 2014).
Good usability of web pages is vital as it can not only prevent users from leaving a website,
but also attract new users (Djamasbi et al., 2010). With the increasing number of consumers
now shopping online and the intense competition faced by so many other online retailers, the
design of a retailer’s website and the online shopping experience that they provide must be
superior to their competitors (Kaushik et al., 2020). The homepage, in particular, is crucial as
it is the first page seen by consumers and it conveys the whole site structure and website
design (Wojdynski & Kalyanaraman, 2016). As online retailing has developed, the information
presented on retailers’ websites has become much more varied and technologically advanced,
as webpages have evolved from being simple and static to dynamic content (Tarafdar &
Zhang, 2007). Thus, multimedia information should be organised and presented in a way that
is useful and not overwhelming for users (ibid). Even though websites are dynamic, various
eye-tracking studies use static screenshots to represent these websites in their experiments.
To explain, websites are not the same as other visual stimuli because they are interactive,
therefore, static screenshots are not accurate indictors of their nature and asking people to
view them is not representative of user behaviour on them. Yang (2011) found that the users’
scan paths were more varied on more complex webpages, indicating that real, interactive
websites will not be viewed the same as static screenshots. Thus, the same findings cannot
be applied when people look at a picture or text as when they look at a website. This
emphasises a gap in the literature as there are a lack of website design studies conducted on
live websites. The present study fills this gap, contributing to knowledge by answering a call
by Huddleston et al. (2015) for future eye-tracking studies to be conducted in real-time
shopping environments as users might respond differently in this context.
This article contributes to knowledge by providing a rich interpretation of eye-tracking data
and attention on a retail homepage, showing the interplay between top-down and bottom-up
attention on a user’s shopping journey. Eye-tracking data reveals the visual hierarchy of a
retail homepage and qualitative data provides a rich discussion on the design stimuli that
attract attention and why. The findings are valuable for future academic research as well as
practitioners. Furthermore, this study provides methodological contributions, highlighting the
importance of using live websites for research to increase ecological validity.
Attention & The Theory of Visual Hierarchy
Attention occurs when a user focuses their thoughts on an item (Rath et al., 2015). Therefore,
the amount of attention that an object receives shows the cognitive load that is required in
order to process it (Scott and Hand, 2016). Attention is a psychological construct and eye-
tracking technology can measure how it is directed to various areas of interest (Meißner & Oll,
2019). Users cannot possibly process all of the stimuli that they encounter, and so are
selective, paying attention only to those that relate to their needs and wants and that they
hope will meet their expectations (Rath et al., 2015). Thus, users pay greater attention to
features that provide information that will help them achieve their task (Wedel and Pieters,
2008b). The human brain relies on the cognitive process of attention to focus neural resources
to decipher sensory stimuli that are relevant at that moment, as we do not have the capacity
to process everything around us at any one time (Katsuki & Constantinidis, 2014), and so
certain elements are more likely to be noticed and processed than others according to the
theory of visual hierarchy. People have a limited cognitive capacity, so when the information
load exceeds a person’s cognitive capability, information overload occurs (Hu & Krishen,
2019). By comparing how much attention people direct on one area provides an indication as
to how relevant it is (Meißner & Oll, 2019).
As aforementioned, this research is underpinned by the theory of visual hierarchy, which
advocates that viewing behaviour consists of two cognitive phases: searching (locating a point
of entry to the page) and scanning (extracting information from the webpage once that point
of entry has been found) (Faraday, 2000). When a user views a webpage for the first time,
these searching and scanning behaviours occur sequentially (Scott and Hand, 2016). This
implies that searching and scanning behaviour can be affected by the visual and textual design
features on websites (Djamasbi et al., 2011). Djamasbi et al. (2011) highlight that both the
search and scanning processes can be altered, the former by changing the size, colour, style,
and location of elements on websites and the latter by amending the proximity and order of
these elements, and thus, the design of the webpage can be manipulated in order to change
which aspects receive the most attention. During the initial few seconds after a user first
accesses the website, the elements that stand out the most visually will receive the most
attention and influence the user’s attitude towards the website (Schall, 2014). This indicates
why one of the most important aspects of website design is the way in which the information
is arranged (Tarafdar & Zhang, 2007).
The visual marketing attention theory advocates that there are two different factors that affect
attentional processes when people are looking at marketing stimuli: bottom-up and top-down
down (Wedel and Pieters, 2008b). Bottom-up factors are those which are stimulus–driven,
whereas top-down factors are those which are goal-driven (Imamoglu et al., 2018). Bottom-
up factors that influence attention are those which result from the features of the visual stimuli
at which the person is looking (Cortinas et al., 2019). Hence, bottom-up factors that affect
attention are aspects such as a feature’s size, shape, content, visual clutter and location on a
webpage (Drèze & Hussherr, 2003; Orquin & Mueller Loose, 2013). It is the visual
characteristics of the stimulus that draws peoples’ attention to it (Meißner & Oll, 2019). For
example, bold advertising messages, bright colours, or simply the position of an image can
have an impact on where a user looks first and for how long, which can be visualised through
eye-tracking research (Hwang et al., 2009; Meißner et al., 2019). By changing the features on
a webpage, web designers can draw users’ attention to particular areas on the page (Roth et
al., 2013). Therefore, the layout and type of information on the webpage may also affect
viewing patterns (Scott & Hand, 2016). There is a paucity of research focusing on bottom-up
factors and their role in capturing attention, an aspect that eye-tracking research enables us
to explore further (Huddleston et al., 2015).
Contrarily, top-down factors that affect attention are personal characteristics; those which
relate to that person’s expectations, objectives and emotions (Cortinas et al., 2019).
Therefore, top-down (or goal-driven) attention is influenced by the user’s goal or target and
the search scene location (Hwang et al., 2009), and refers to the internal guidance of attention
based on prior knowledge of the stimulus (Wedel & Pieters, 2008a; Katsuki & Constantinidis,
2014). Thus, top-down attention is guided primarily by the user’s mindset and motivation, not
just the layout of the webpage (Scott & Hand, 2016). As a result, top-down attention advocates
that people direct their attention differently depending on their search goal, such as paying
more attention to the price of an item if the goal is to save money (Meißner & Oll, 2019).
Hwang et al. (2009) found that if participants are given research tasks, the top-down approach
explains the guidance of eye-movements and the length of the fixation.
In order to accurately determine a person’s attention, their gaze must be measured, which can
be done by capturing and analysing their eye movements (Scott & Hand, 2016). Eye-tracking
enables researchers to measure users’ behaviour and cognitive processing in an objective
way, counteracting the limitations of traditional research methods (Boardman and McCormick,
2021). There are many different types of eye movements, the most important of which are
fixations. A fixation is when the eyes are resting on an object or stimulus whereby information
A fixation is when the eyes are resting on an object or stimulus whereby information gathering
occurs (Chae & Lee, 2013). The duration of a fixation, and the number of fixations on a
stimulus, therefore, indicates information processing and cognitive load (Scott & Hand, 2016).
Attention indicates what areas are important to users on a website but it does not tell us why
the stimulus is receiving attention, and whether this is a positive or negative aspect. The higher
the amount of attention an item receives, the higher the cognitive load used to process it (Scott
and Hand, 2016). Yet, there is no consensus in the literature about whether this higher
cognitive load has positive or negative connotations, and therefore, whether long fixation
durations or high fixation counts indicate positive or negative attention. For instance, some
eye-tracking studies have interpreted high fixation counts and long fixation durations as
negative as they indicate confusion (Cyr et al., 2009; Cyr et al., 2010; Lee & Ahn, 2012;
Romano et al., 2013). However, other studies have interpreted high fixation counts and long
fixation durations as positive because they indicate an interest in the stimuli (Djamasbi et al.,
2010; Lee & Ahn, 2012; Cyr & Head, 2013; Chae & Lee, 2013). This is illustrated by the fact
that people may look at a paragraph of text for a long time because they find the content
relevant and interesting, or because they find it hard to understand (Nielsen & Pernice, 2010).
Thus, as attention can be interpreted in different ways, additional data, such as interviews, are
needed to correctly interpret what a user’s fixations actually mean. As eye-tracking technology
has become more widely available, the challenge for researchers has changed from simply
being able to collect accurate eye-tracking data, to interpreting large volumes of eye-tracking
data in a meaningful way (Shi et al., 2013). To the authors’ knowledge, no study has explored
what the attention to different design stimuli on a retail homepage means using qualitative
methods, a gap that the present research will fill.
Method
In order to understand the processing of attention on a live website, a multi-methods approach
was employed. Visual attention was measured through the eye-tracking data by interpreting
participant’s fixations through the analysis of gaze plots, heat maps, gaze replay videos and
numerical statistics. Triangulation of the data sets were guaranteed by incorporating
qualitative post-experiment think-alouds and semi-structured interviews in order to inform the
interpretation of the eye-tracking data, which is one of the key methodological contributions of
this study. Rather than solely focusing on numerical and visual data, this research obtains rich
user insights by addressing the why and how questions through a qualitative inquiry.
Participants and Live Website
A purposive sample of 52 participants, spread across a wide age range (20-70) was recruited.
This sample size is comparable to other eye-tracking studies on websites (Menon et al., 2016;
Cyr and Head, 2013; Cortinas et al., 2019) and was determined based on Nielsen Norman
Group Theory (2021), which distinguishes between quantitative and qualitative sample sizes
for eye-tracking studies. Nielsen’s (2021) theory suggests that approximately 20-40
participants may be needed to achieve valid and reliable user testing results for quantitative
eye-tracking studies, whilst for qualitative eye-tracking analysis, which is based on the re-
watching of gaze replay videos, a sample size of 6 is sufficient.
The sample was all-female, which can be seen as biased, as it only focuses one segment of
the market. However, the participants were purposefully selected for various reasons: 1)
survey data highlights a “gender gap between online and in-store shopping” (Zaczkiewicz,
2018), whereby those identifying as male prefer physical store environments. One explanation
as to why this may be the case is that males are target shoppers and prefer a tactile
environment in which they are able to touch and feel the products they are purchasing,
whereas those identifying as female favour online stores, as they allow for price comparisons
(Thomas, 2018). The latter aspect links to reason 2) in that females are often the ‘prime’
shoppers, which implies that they are not only purchasing items for themselves, but also for
their dependents (e.g., children or individuals they have caring responsibilities for), and/or their
partners, and as such are the drivers for any type of purchases (Burkolter & Kluge, 2011;
Brennan, 2013; Cavill, 2019; Statista, 2019).
A further key criterion for the sample was that participants had to be regular customers of the
retail website and have made a purchase within the previous 3 months. There are various
reasons for this, 1) Childers et al. (2001) highlight that these two aspects (familiarity and
regular shoppers) increases the overall ecological data validity, allowing us to not only process
attention from a bottom-up perspective, but also from a top-down perspective as consumers
are aware of the homepage as a result of their prior experience and understanding of the
website (Wedel & Pieters, 2008a; Katsuki & Constantinidis, 2014). 2) Within this research
different age groups were selected with the youngest participants being in their 20s and the
oldest ones in their 70s. This implies that only some of the participants are so-called digital
natives, whilst the majority of the sample falls into the category of digital nomads, those that
have seen and/or experienced technological development first hand. Being familiar with a
website implies that participants did not need to get acquainted with the website prior to
fulfilling a task, but rather were able to act upon it straight away, which is important for older
participants in particular. This ensures that the gaze plots and heat maps are a more accurate
reflection of a user’s regular behaviour, facilitating genuine comparisons between those that
are digital nomads and those who are digital natives that need less time to familiarise
themselves with digital innovations (e.g., Francis & Hoefle, 2018). Research shows that
existing prior knowledge and experience of using a website influences behavioural intentions
(Chih-Chung & Chang, 2005). Thus, using participants who are familiar with a website
provides real-life data that can be used by fashion retailers. Although only one task was
performed per participant, this is deemed sufficient, as it mirrors the search behaviour of actual
consumers.
As indicated, rather than using a static website, as has been the case in previous studies (e.g.
Djamasbi et al., 2010, 2011; Luan et al., 2016), we utilised a live website, as it provides insights
into real-world cognition and generates behaviours in a natural context. A key drawback of
static website screenshots is the lack of interaction, which users of a live website are
accustomed to and thus, it may take time for consumers to interpret and cognitively process
what is happening in the experiments (Ladouce et al., 2017). Websites are made up of a
complex mixture of text, images, and interactive content and thus differ dramatically from static
images. A question that arises here is whether findings on a real live website could differ and
further enhance our understanding of web design and user behaviour, an aspect which is
addressed in this research.
Although a small number of studies (e.g. Shi et al., 2013; Cortinas et al., 2019) have used
simulated websites for eye-tracking experiments, consisting of partial mock websites that
imitate the real thing, thereby facilitating interaction, the present study chose to conduct the
experiment on a real live website in order to get the most realistic attention data on a
homepage as possible. Although infinitely more realistic than static screen shots, simulated
websites still limit the possibility of analysing consumers’ actual experiences when shopping
online (Tupikovskaja-Omovie and Tyler, 2020). As the homepage is the first page that
participants land on, it was important that participants did not expend cognitive processing
time trying to get their bearings as this study aimed to uncover exactly what they did when
they were shopping online normally and how long it took them. Thus, although simulated
websites offer many benefits, the researchers felt that using a real website increased the
ecological validity of the present study. Indeed, Tupikovskaja-Omovie and Tyler (2021) state
that eye-tracking experiments should be designed in the most natural and least disruptive way.
Although it could be argued that using a live retail website may challenge generalisability, as
findings may only be valid and reliable for one retailer, it has to be highlighted that the majority
of fashion retailers generally use very similar website designs (Bargas-Avila, 2012; Ellis,
2018). To explain, the fashion industry is a highly volatile market environment, in which
consumers are able to switch between brands relatively easily, especially when it comes to
online purchases. Having similar website designs denotes that consumers can find information
more easily, as the pathway to accessing information is structured in a similar manner.
Fashion retail websites usually have a search bar in the top right corner, whilst the general
drop-down menu is located to the left. Moreover, Ellis (2018) points out that fashion retailers
have more distinguishing features in their physical store, with only a few (predominantly luxury
fashion) seeking to mirror this in the online environment. However, as outlined, in this
research participants were recruited on the basis that they were familiar with the website for
one key reason: even though websites are similar, there remain some differences in terms of
the actual order of menu bars or, for example, dominance of the search function. Being familiar
with the website was seen as a preventative measure for distress.
Multi-methods: eye-tracking, retrospective think-alouds, and semi-structured interviews
Eye-tracking was used to analyse visual information and qualitative data to interpret and
understand consumer perceptions and feelings towards the homepage. This triangulation of
methodological tools provided an interpretation of visual attention on website design stimuli,
providing a more in-depth understanding of why certain stimuli are salient on a retail
homepage. Husić-Mehmedović et al. (2017) insist that there is a need for data sets that are
more interpretive and qualitative in nature in order to understand the underpinning subjective
meaning of what people see, feel, and think. Thus, the present study provides a
counterbalance to previous website design studies that have predominantly used mono-
methods heavily reliant on statistical measures.
Within this research all participants completed the eye-tracking, retrospective think-alouds,
and semi-structured interviews. Prior to conducting the main study, a pilot study was
undertaken with 6 participants (excluded from the data set), in order to amend the research
design if necessary. Data was collected in the following order:
· Eye-tracking – to understand the distribution of attention on the homepage.
· Retrospective think-alouds – to explain the eye-tracking journey.
· Semi-structured interviews – to inform the eye-tracking data and provide a deeper
understanding of why different stimuli do/do not capture attention.
Thus, the eye-tracking data showed the areas that are visually salient, whilst the retrospective
think-alouds provided further explanations of the consumer’s cognitive processing when
looking at each area of the homepage. The semi-structured interviews then provided further
depth into consumers’ responses, informing the researchers why the areas were salient.
Eye-Tracking And Retrospective Think-Alouds
The eye-tracking experiment was conducted on a Tobii TX 300 video-based eye-tracker with
a 300 Hz sampling rate. The eye tracker uses the corneal reflection method to capture eye
movements, shining subtle infrared lights from LEDs into the eyes that are reflected on
participants’ pupils. The eye-tracker is unobtrusive, operating like a desktop computer without
any additional requirements, such as a chin rest, and can capture data accurately regardless
of participants’ age, ethnicity, glasses, contact lenses, mascara or ‘droopy’ eyelids, making
the data highly reliable (Tobii). The compensation for large head movements enables
participants to move freely and naturally, whilst still ensuring accurate measurements,
improving the validity of the experiment (Tobii). All participants had normal vision and were
seated approximately 60cm away from the eye tracker (Luan et al., 2016). Participants were
calibrated using a 9-point calibration test before being provided with instructions to use the
website as they would do normally when shopping online. Participants replicated their typical
online shopper journey by freely browsing the website clicking on anything that interested
them. This implies that they could ‘shop’ for any item of interest, whether for themselves and/or
any dependent. Data were collected on multiple pages, however for this paper the focus was
on the homepage. There was no time limit placed on the task in order to try and make it as
realistic as possible (Wedel & Pieters, 2008a) as time pressure could influence gaze behaviour
(Meißner & Oll, 2019).
The majority of the homepage fit on the screen but a small section (terms and conditions etc)
was below the fold of the page. No participants scrolled down so this did not impact on the
findings. The researchers did not want to manipulate the website in any way in order to ensure
that users’ natural behaviour was captured to increase ecological validity, so did not limit them
from scrolling down if they wanted to.
Eye-tracking provides an objective measure of users’ reactions to a retailer’s website through
their eye movements (Djamasbi et al., 2010) and allows for an analysis of the users’
experiences of a webpage, as unconscious actions and aspects that users may not be able
to describe can be recorded (Romano Bergstrom & Schall, 2014). The eye-mind hypothesis
suggests that what people look at is the same as what they think about (Just & Carpenter,
1980), and thus, fixation durations and fixation counts indicate information processing and the
cognitive load required to process that item (Scott & Hand, 2016). Therefore, attention is
analysed through fixations, as users respond to design stimuli that they are drawn too, and
thus think about as a result (Nielsen & Pernice, 2010).
Eye-tracking data was analysed by a number of different techniques in order to provide rigour
and validity to the findings, such as statistical data, gaze plots, heat maps and gaze replay
videos, based on users’ fixations. A fixation was defined as 250 milliseconds as anything less
than this is too quick to indicate cognitive processing (Lorigo et al., 2006). Gaze plots were
analysed as they highlight the user’s sequence of fixations. Heat maps were analysed as they
visualise attention by showing the distribution and concentration of participants’ attention
through different colours, providing a more intuitive understanding of the degree of attention
on the homepage (Wang et al. 2014).
Areas of interest (AOIs), consisting of geometric shapes around website design stimuli, were
used to enable the researchers to analyse how much attention had been directed to that area
based on the fixations (Huddleston et al., 2015; Meißner et al., 2019). AOIs were created
based on the most salient areas (as indicated through the gaze replay videos, gaze plots and
heat maps) in order to analyse the visual metrics for each and compare them.
Statistical measures provided numerical insights into fixations, enabling the researchers to
compare the AOIs accurately. Using the software built into the eye tracker, for each AOI we
calculated the time to first fixation, the total visit duration (also known as total dwell time),
which quantifies how much time was spent on the AOI during the whole experiment (Meißner
& Oll, 2019), and the fixation count, which shows how often a participant viewed an area of
interest (Huddleston et al., 2015). We interpreted total visit duration to be a measure of
cognitive processing through attention, consistent with Wedel and Pieters (2008a) and
Huddleston et al., (2015).
Retrospective think-alouds were used following the eye-tracking task in order to supplement
and interpret the data. Retrospective think-alouds are an effective method to capture
participants’ recollections of an experience after completing a task as they are less likely to
forget aspects of the task if undertaken immediately after its completion (Bojko, 2013).
Participants were shown the homepage retrospectively allowing them to reflect upon their
actions (Olsen et al., 2010) and explain why they looked at/clicked on certain stimuli.
Semi-structured Interviews
Semi-structured interviews provided participants with an opportunity to elaborate, adding
further depth to their cognitive and affective responses to the homepage as well as enabling
them to share their experiences concerning the online user experience (Cyr et al., 2010). Table
1 depicts the interview guide. All the AOIs were discussed, providing a degree of
standardisation to the interviews, but also allowing for probing to occur for a more in-depth
understanding of individuals’ attention on design stimuli. Interviews lasted on average 30
minutes and were recorded and transcribed immediately.
Areas on Website
Questions
General Homepage
What do you see when you look at the homepage?
What do you think about the homepage?
What do you normally do when you land on the homepage?
Why?
Can you give me an example of the last time you went on the
homepage?
Menu Bar
What do you think about the menu bar?
Do you usually look at/use the menu bar when on the
homepage? Why/why not?
Are there any areas that are challenging to use? Why/why not?
How would you improve it?
Rotating Banner
What do you think about the rotating banner?
What would you normally do when you see the rotating
banner? Why?
Do you usually look at/use the rotating banner when on the
homepage? Why/why not?
How would you improve it?
Static Banner
Images
What do you think about these?
What would you normally do when you see the static banner
images? Why?
Do you usually look at/use the static banner images when on the
homepage? Why/why not?
· How would you improve them?
Below the fold of the
page
· What do you think about this area? Why?
· Do you usually look at this area when on the homepage?
Why/why not?
Table 1. Indicative Questions For The Semi-Structured Interviews
The multi-methods used and the resulting data sets that emerged were carefully analysed
using a thematic analysis approach based on the stages outlined by Braun and Clarke (2012).
The AOIs were used as the key themes, but new themes were also able to emerge organically
based on the consumers responses. The researchers coded parts of the data sets individually
first, before discussing emerging patterns. A coding protocol was developed that allowed for
intercoder reliability (Pan et al., 2007), any discrepancies were carefully reviewed and final
codes and patterns agreed on (Corbin & Strauss, 2015; Easterby-Smith et al., 2015). The final
statements that were selected to include in the paper are those that reflected the general
consensus amongst participants based on rigorous analysis.
Results
Participants were asked to replicate their regular shopping journey, spending as long as they
normally would on the website in order to produce the most realistic data set. For this paper,
gaze data was collected from the moment they landed on the homepage until the moment
they clicked off the homepage. The shortest time a participant spent on the homepage was
1.4 seconds, with the longest time 14.3 seconds. The average (mean) time spent on the
homepage by participants was 5.88 seconds.
Participants exploration of the homepage can be seen in Figure 1, which depicts a typical scan
path (gaze plot), the numbers denoting the order of the fixations:
Figure 1 Participant Gaze Plot
Figure 1 demonstrates that participants tended to fixate in the centre of the homepage on the
rotating banner first, followed by the top left menu bar, and then generally alternate between
the two, with some participants also briefly exploring the sub-banner images or the search bar,
and then generally ending their time on the homepage by clicking on a category on the top left
drop-down menu.
Utilising the theory of visual hierarchy, the eye-tracking data showed the distribution of
attention on the homepage:
Figure 2 Heat Map of all participants on the Homepage (Absolute Duration)
Figure 2 shows that the left size of the menu bar and subsequent top left drop-down menu
received the longest fixations on the homepage. Moreover, the eye-tracking data analysis
revealed how many participants fixated on certain areas on the homepage:
Design Stimuli
% of Participants Who Fixated on Design Stimuli
Rotating Banner
100%
Menu bar
98%
Left drop-down menu
96%
Static images under banner
85%
Search bar
44%
Table 2 Distribution of Attention on Homepage
Table 2 shows that all participants fixated on the rotating banner and 98% did on the menu
bar, indicating that they are the most important on the homepage. This is interesting as the
heat map (Figure 2) shows that the top left drop-down menu received the longest fixation
durations, but overall the most attention was displayed on the rotating banner.
Based on the findings concerning design stimuli that received attention (Figure 2 and Table
2) the homepage was divided into the 5 main Areas of Interest (AOIs) for further analysis:
1. Rotating Banner
2. Main Menu Bar
3. Left Drop-down Menu
4. Static Banner Images
5. Search Bar
Figure 3 shows the creation and distribution of the AOIs on the homepage based on the
analysis of the initial gaze replay videos and heat maps.
Figure 3 AOIs Created on the Homepage for Analysis
The total visit duration, which provides us with a measure of time spent attending to an AOI in
total (Huddleston et al., 2015) for each of these 5 AOIs is depicted in Figure 4:
Figure 4 Average Total Visit Duration on Each AOI
Figure 4 demonstrates that attention on the homepage was primarily spent on the rotating
banner (6.74 seconds on average) followed by the menu bar (5.49 seconds) and the left
drop-down menu (4.98 seconds). This also highlights that, although only 44% of participants
fixated on the search bar and 85% fixated on the static banner images (Table 2), those that
did fixate on the search bar did so for slightly longer than those that did the static banner
images, although the times are very comparable (1.51 seconds & 1.55 seconds). Hence, the
visual hierarchy of the retail homepage is as follows:
1. Rotating Banner
2. Main Menu Bar
3. Left Drop-down Menu
4. Static Banner Images
5. Search Bar
The distribution of attention on the 5 AOIs will now be analysed in further detail.
1. Rotating Banner
The rotating banner consisted of a series of images of the latest trends. It received the most
attention on the homepage, with an average total visit duration of 6.74 seconds. On average,
the rotating banner received participants’ first fixation, taking an average time of 0.81 seconds
to look at it, much faster than all other stimuli, indicating that it was the first point of entry to
the homepage that participants engaged with.
The instant visibility of the rotating banner was confirmed by the qualitative data. When asked:
‘What do you see when you look at the homepage?’ P.38 answered: ‘Mainly it’s just the moving
images’. By including the rotating banner, users found the homepage to be more ‘interactive’:
‘I like the fact that this changes… you can see what deals are on, you can see
inspiration for outfits, what the trends are. I think it’s good, even just moving it looks
more interactive so it sort of grabs your attention…’ (P.35).
Nevertheless, the qualitative data revealed that some participants had negative feelings
towards the banner; it was ‘distracting’ and ‘annoying’ as it kept flashing. As Figure 2 shows,
the fixations on the rotating banner were widely distributed over a larger surface area, making
them less dense than the fixations on the drop-down menu. This is highlighted by the very
high number of fixations placed on the banner, with an average fixation count of 29.27
fixations, 10 fixations more than the menu bar. Furthermore, the gaze replay videos showed
that participants looked at the rotating banner and then away again several times, as it kept
drawing their attention and distracting them from their task, as shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5 Participant’s Gaze Plot Demonstrating The Exchange Of Fixations Between The
Rotating Banner And The Drop-Down Menu
This explains why the rotating banner received the highest number of fixations, yet only 12%
of participants clicked on it. Interview data confirmed participants irritation:
‘If I was looking at it for a long time I think it would irritate me but because I’m only
clicking straight into the next step it’s fine. I can understand why they do it, it gives it a
bit more of a lively feel…’ (P.6).
This statement is further supported by the heat map (Figure 2), where the main fixations were
generally in the centre of the banner.
2. Menu Bar and 3. Drop-down Menu
The menu bar and left drop-down menu ranked second and third regarding the amount of
attention received on the homepage with an average total visit duration of 5.49 seconds and
4.98 seconds respectively. On average the fixation durations were longer on the menu bar
than the drop-down menu, with an average fixation lasting 0.31 seconds on the menu bar as
opposed to 0.23 seconds on the drop-down menu. Indeed, the menu bars received the
second highest number of fixations, with an average fixation count of 19.27 fixations for the
main menu and 15.60 for the drop-down menu. This emphasises the importance of
navigational stimuli, such as menu bars, in the online shopping experience.
On average the main menu bar received participants’ second fixations (first being the rotating
banner), with an average time to first fixation of 1.62 seconds on the menu bar and 2.02
seconds on the drop-down menu, indicating that it was the area that participants wanted to
locate when landing on the homepage as it was the first fixation that they chose, rather than
the first fixation, which is an indication of bottom-up attention as it is primarily influenced by
motion and large images.
The retrospective think-alouds highlighted that consumers appreciated that the menu bar is a
familiar, standard feature on retail websites, making it easy to use:
‘I like it. You can see everything. I would look at jeans, click on them, and then go back
to the drop-down menu for the tops after. I like the fact that its all there, it’s listed, and
you can just skim, you don’t have to look at all of it to find out what you want’ (P.27).
‘I just do it through habit… I just look straight at the categories…’ (P.38)
Participants only clicked on a very narrow selection of options on the menu bar (Table 3):
Menu Bar Options
% of Participants that Clicked on this Option
Top Left Drop-down Menu
44%
New In
25%
Shoes
11%
Sale
11%
Designers and Brands
6%
Accessories
3%
Table 3. Categories Clicked on the Menu Bar
Overall, only 40% (6/15 categories) of the menu bar options were clicked on, which is a clear
indicator of selective visual perception. Indeed, the interviews highlighted that participants felt
overwhelmed by the number of options on the menu bar:
‘…there doesn’t need to be so many… lingerie could be under fashion, swimwear
could be under fashion… Because they’re all clothes, they’re all stuff that you wear.
So there just shouldn’t be as many… just cut down on the words… the simpler it is,
the easier I think…’ (P.42).
Therefore, the interviews provided an explanation as to why attention on the menu bars
decreased from left to right and top to bottom: there were too many categories to process.
4. Static Banner Images
Even though 85% of participants looked at the static banner images, they only received an
average total visit duration of 1.51 seconds. This can be partly explained by the lack of
attention further down in general:
‘I don’t particularly like this bit at the bottom… you’ve got like what they want to sell…
in the main picture here, but then these underneath... it’s lost in it... it’s just lost because
you’re too busy looking at that… [It could be improved by] maybe having these where
they would be seen a bit more… so they’re still within eye level as you go across,
instead of having to move and scroll down…’ (P.16).
In the interviews, some participants likened the static images to advertisements which was
seen as off-putting. Furthermore, the images themselves were not deemed to be particularly
enticing:
‘I think they’re relevant but I don’t tend to look at them that much because they’re just
standard women wearing clothes type images so I don’t pay much attention to them’
(P.47).
Nevertheless, it took participants an average of 3.00 seconds to fixate on the static banner
images, which is longer than the rotating banner and menu bar, but still a relatively quick time.
The static banner images also had a relatively low average fixation count of 9.18 fixations,
which was mainly spent looking between the three images and deciding whether to click on
them or not. This suggests that the images themselves were fairly clear and not confusing.
Furthermore, the gaze replay videos found that 12% of participants clicked on one of the static
banner images, the same number of people that clicked on the rotating banner. However, only
85% participants looked at the static banner images, which is fewer than the amount that
looked at the rotating banner image (100% of participants) and those that did so looked at it
for much less time and with much fewer fixations. This implies that the static banner images
are not as eye-catching as the rotating banner, namely due to the lack of motion, but when
users do notice them they decide to click on them very quickly.
5. Search Bar
The search bar is located at the top centre-right of the homepage and received an average
total visit duration of 1.55 seconds. It took on average of 8.41 seconds for participants to
fixate on the search bar, the longest time to fixate on any of the elements by far. The interviews
revealed that this was because users felt that the menu bar was the first port of call for
accessing items that they wanted to look at:
‘I don’t know, it’s because the website’s quite direct and so you don’t need to, all the
options are there for you so I don’t really need it for fashion’ (P.43).
As a result, only 20% of participants used it. Hence, participants would not generally use the
search bar if they were browsing but may use it if they were looking for a particular item or if
they had ‘less time’ as they found it more convenient. As aforementioned, participants felt
overwhelmed by the options available on the menu bar. As a result, if they were unable to
quickly access what they were looking for on the menu bar, they used the search bar:
‘… it’s for stuff that’s not that obvious… I typed ‘blue tankini’ in. Because I couldn’t be
bothered to go through the swimwear…’ (P.42).
‘Yes I have used that when I’ve been looking for something specific… I wanted some
linen trousers for work and so instead of going through trousers and trying to find them
I just typed in linen in there… I just thought it was easier doing it that way…’ (P.40).
The search bar had the lowest fixation count with an average of 4.61 fixations, indicating that
it was clear and not confusing for participants to work out, they simply located it and typed in
what they wanted.
Five areas were identified from the heat maps concerning attention, however the eye-tracking
results further highlighted that there was a lack of attention below the fold of the page (Figure
6).
Figure 6. Gaze Plots of all Participants on the Homepage
Figure 6 shows that only 1 participant out of 52 looked below the fold of the page, and for just
two fixations, before scrolling back up. This was explained by the retrospective think-alouds:
‘I tend to just ignore the bits at the bottom and look at the things going on at the top...
because you’re going on to look for something, it tends to be the small print the things
at the bottom…’ (P.22).
However, this was contradicted by others, revealing they valued the area ‘below the fold’:
‘Yes I do (think it is important)… I’ve looked there if I’ve wanted to get in touch with
them… And I’ve also looked to check the delivery down there’ (P.34).
This shows the influence of top-down attention, as users focused on the areas that will help
them complete their task.
Discussion, Conclusion & Implications
This article contributes to knowledge by providing an in-depth understanding of users’
attention on a retailer’s homepage, an explanation of the visual hierarchy on it and whether
the attention placed on certain stimuli is positive or negative, thereby addressing a gap in the
literature. The visual hierarchy of a retail homepage is as follows:
1. Rotating Banner
2. Main Menu Bar
3. Left Drop-down Menu
4. Static Banner Images
5. Search Bar
A further contribution is the triangulation of data from the eye-tracking, retrospective think-
alouds and subsequent qualitative interviews which provides an illustration of both ‘bottom-
up’ and ‘top-down’ attention and the interplay between them on a retail homepage. The
attention given to the menu bar was ‘top-down’ as it enabled users to fulfil their goals and it
met their needs. On the other hand, the rotating banner shows the power of ‘bottom-up’
attention, with the size and motion of the images distracting users, resulting in them paying
this design stimuli the most attention overall. The results illustrate how the attention measures
can indicate the bottom-up and top-down processes of different natures.
This study contributes to knowledge by applying the theory of visual hierarchy to a retail
homepage to determine which elements are more likely to be noticed and processed than
others when users are shopping online and why this is the case. This research has practical
implications for online retailers as it emphasises the most important design features on a
homepage for attracting attention. All participants fixated on the rotating banner, 98% on the
menu bar and 96% on the top left drop-down menu, indicating that they are the most important
aspects of the homepage for users. This has implications for retailers when designing their
website in terms of where to focus on and make the most intuitive.
The rotating banner was the first point of entry to the homepage that participants engaged
with, which concurs with Djamasbi et al. (2010) who found that a main large image was likely
to be attended to within the first two fixations and Prisacari and Holme (2013) who found that
motion has the biggest impact on visual hierarchy. From the triangulation of data from the eye-
tracking and subsequent interviews it is evident that although the rotating banner received the
most attention, users’ perception of the banner varied. Some found it inspirational and/ or
informative, providing suggestions about trends or offers, however, many others found it
‘irritating’. It was evident from the eye-tracking data that some participants were trying to focus
on the menu bar but kept getting distracted by the rotating banner, particularly as it changed
image, as shown from the fixations going back and forth between the menu bar and rotating
banner. This indicates that it is the size and motion that makes the rotating banner eye-
catching rather than its content. The implications of these findings for retailers are that the
current content on (rotating) main banner images are not necessarily seen as worthy of
consumers’ attention. To not to be perceived as ‘annoying’, retailers need to ensure that the
content is relevant to the consumer. The rotating banner images featured generic trends, such
as ‘frock and frill’ or ‘grunge’, making it slightly ambiguous what it may lead to. As the purpose
is to draw attention to a specific product and/ or service it could be that the ambiguous nature
of the visuals featuring trends posed a different way to shop than some consumers prefer,
such as shopping via a product category. Future research could explore this further.
This also suggests that the quality of the design stimuli is very important, and that retailers
cannot simply just include a rotating banner, it must feature content that is entertaining and
appropriate in order to garner consumer interest. As attention on the rotating banner is bottom-
up, retailers can capitalise on this opportunity by placing important and/or enticing information
and personalised content on it in order to influence users’ shopping journeys and experiences.
This also suggests that further personalisation or customisation of homepages to suit
individual consumer needs may be warranted, an aspect that could be investigated further in
future research.
The main menu bar received participants’ second fixation indicating that it was the area that
participants wanted to locate when landing on the homepage. This concurs with Nielsen &
Pernice (2010) and Djamasbi et al. (2010) who found that users fixated on the global
navigation within their first few fixations and with Roth et al. (2013) that users have
expectations relating to where certain items are on a web page. The top left drop-down menu
was where users expected the main product categories to be located in order to fulfil their
shopping needs (top-down attention). Thus, retailers should ensure that they put their most
popular product categories in the top left drop-down menu. Yet, Figure 2 shows that
consumers are very selective in their visual attention and do not focus on all of the categories
on the menu bar, but simply skim them, looking for their target (top-down attention). Thus,
fixation density decreases from left to right and top to bottom on the menu bars. The interviews
provide an explanation as to why attention on the menu bars decreased from left to right and
top to bottom: there were too many categories to process. Participants did not use most of the
options available to them, primarily going to ‘Fashion’ or ‘New In’, located in the top left-hand
corner. Therefore, menu bars should not provide too much choice for users as it results in
them feeling overwhelmed. This research identified that only 40% of the options were selected
which could significantly impact sales of certain product categories. Design implications for
retailers are they need to simplify and streamline their menu bar for it to be the most effective
and enable users to see clearly where they want to go. Further academic research could
consider the optimum number of options that participants process in regards to drop-down
menus. Retailers should also place their most popular product categories closer to the top.
The static images on the website tend to be promotion information, sales/ discounts or product
types (e.g. boots, blazers). The qualitative interviews enabled us to understand why the static
images did not receive as much attention: they were interpreted as advertisements. The static
images are not traditional banner ads, but they may be being mistaken for some
subconsciously by users. This illustrates that qualitative data allows us to interpret the eye-
tracking data more accurately and understand why certain areas receive more attention than
others. The lack of overall attention placed on the static banner images suggests that these
should not be prioritised by retailers. Indeed, they could be removed altogether with the focus
being on a more personalised and relevant rotating banner image, as their location towards
the bottom of the page is never going to attract as much attention as the centre and top left
areas of the homepage. Future research could explore whether changing the design of these
types of images impacts on the level of attention they receive, or whether the location further
down the page means that they will not receive much attention in general.
The final area of interest was the search bar, which facilitates an easy shopping experience
and saves consumers time when they are goal-directed shopping. This area has the lowest
number of fixations and the study concurs with Scott and Hand (2016) that the upper-right
corner of the web page was neglected by users. However, the present study builds on the
literature further, as the interviews revealed that users knew that the search bar was there but
felt that the menu bar was the first port of call for accessing items that they wanted to look at,
and so chose this option over the search bar during their regular shopping journey. This is a
new finding and contribution to knowledge, reflecting the way that people now shop online.
However, the interviews revealed that users take comfort in the knowledge that the search bar
is located in the top right corner for when they are in a rush or overwhelmed by the menu bars.
Therefore, retailers should keep the search bar in the top right corner in order to fulfil users’
expectations and focus on producing an accurate and effective search when users do want it.
Hence, this study disagrees with Wang et al. (2014) that ‘most users prefer to use the search
bar to find items that they want to purchase on a website’. Wang et al., (2014) used simulated
websites and asked participants to find and purchase a specific type of mobile phone,
suggesting that the findings are different for regular users who are familiar with the website,
shopping in the way that they would normally do. This also implies that findings based on
online shopping for search goods, such as phones, may be different to those based on
experience goods, such as clothes. Further research could investigate whether this is the
case.
The results found that ‘below the fold of the page’ does not receive attention on a user’s regular
shopping journey, concurring with research by Djamasbi et al. (2011), Yang (2011) and
Nielsen and Pernice (2010). The interview data suggest that this was because the ‘small print’,
‘adverts’, ‘terms and conditions’, and ‘legal stuff’, was deemed unimportant and largely ignored
when browsing the website, and below the fold of the page was where they expected this to
be. This shows the influence of top-down attention, as users focused on the areas that will
help them complete their task. However, this study makes a valuable contribution to the
literature by using qualitative data to gain a greater understanding of this behaviour, revealing
that users still wanted this section to be included, as the knowledge that it was there when
they needed it made them feel more secure when using the site. Thus, if it was abolished this
could result in a loss of trust between the consumer and the retailer. Therefore, the study
advocates that retailers should continue to use the current design with important information
located below the fold of the page, and the lack of attention it receives is misleading in how
valuable consumers find it to be. Hence, the triangulation of data provides a more holistic view
of consumers’ responses to the homepage, as, although certain areas of the website may be
viewed less, they are still vital for when they need it. The security of knowing that important
information can be accessed below the fold satisfied participants, suggesting that not including
it could result in a loss of trust. The participants were regular users of the website and thus,
familiar with the information and where it is located as they have looked for it previously. This
shows the importance of using real consumers as participants and how it enhances the
ecological validity of the study. Yet, a key implication here is that any information that
companies’ want to be seen by their consumers on their regular shopping journey should be
located above the fold of the homepage.
The live website represents a standard retail homepage design and so the results are
generalisable to other retail homepages other than fashion retailers. Goree et al., (2021)
researched the homogeneity of web design identifying that the range of website designs that
we see online are reducing. Their research identified that layout homogenization has been
driven by reliance on libraries, templates, and services that mitigate the complexity of creating
modern web designs that require responsive web design for mobile browsers that are
accessible and usable. Further benefits of homogenised design include its sense of familiarity
to new consumers, facilitating the creation of inclusive websites that are accessible to all and
spaces that meet user expectations. The website used in this research was a standard format
for a high-street fashion retail website in regards to the visual and navigational interface. Due
to the standard retail website format, users have an expectation of the design, making it
second nature to look for certain design stimuli in specific areas of the site. Future research
could test different homepage designs, such as the flat scrolling design feature on websites
such as Netflix, to see how the findings differ.
This research is based on real-world scenarios, such as a live website and natural shopping
behaviour, using real customers, making it invaluable as it provides ecological validity to
studies in an area that is very fast-paced. Using a live website enabled us to produce a
different set of results from previous studies that were based on static images of web pages,
namely in the fact that eye-tracking studies based on static images of web pages advocate
that retailers should place rotating banners or large main images as a priority on their
homepages, when in reality our data demonstrate that they are seen as ‘annoying’, distracting
users from undertaking their shopping journey. Indeed, this study contributes to knowledge by
demonstrating the current battle that is taking place between the competing elements of
bottom-up and top-down attention on the homepage, with distracting design stimuli (bottom-
up attention) making it more difficult for people to engage in their shopping task and pay
attention to the design stimuli that will help them to fulfil their shopping goal (top-down
attention). The triangulation of methods allowed us to uncover these findings. This research
methodology further contributes to knowledge by exploring users’ attention on a live retail
homepage in order to provide a greater understanding of what the attention on each of the
design stimuli means and why some areas are more salient than others. The triangulation of
methods demonstrates that all attention on a web page is not necessarily positive, even when
made by the same user during the same shopping journey. The qualitative data informed the
researchers that some stimuli received attention due to them being useful, serving a functional
purpose (menu bars, search bar), whereas others did because they were perceived as
interesting (static banner images) and some because they were distracting and irritating
(rotating banner image). The value of a multi-methods approach is highlighted here as mono-
methods do not allow for a holistic picture to emerge and may result in misleading
conclusions/assumptions. For example, by revealing that the menu bar and the rotating
banner are the most salient stimuli, the eye-tracking data implies that they are effective and
do not need to be improved. However, the qualitative data reveals that consumers want the
menu bar to be simplified as it is over-complicated and that the rotating banner is an ‘annoying
distraction’ that needs to contain better features and clearer categories.
Limitations and Future Research
As outlined in the methodology section, an all-female sample, who performed a familiar task
on a familiar website, was utilised within this research. This could be seen as a limitation, as
there may be potential gender differences between search behaviour for, not only those
individuals identifying as male and female consumers, but also those individuals who may
identify as neither male nor female. Seeing as gender fluidity is becoming an increasingly
discussed topic within the industry, this could provide an interesting area for future research.
Future research could focus on different age brackets and compare their attention and
behaviour on retail websites, as Boardman and McCormick (2018) found that consumers of
different age groups had different preferences and motivations when shopping
online. Moreover, within this research all participants performed a task that they were familiar
with and as such the overall stimulus was familiar. It would be interesting to see whether
results may change if consumers are exposed to unfamiliar stimuli, especially when it comes
to digital nomads. Therefore, future research could compare the differences of users who are
familiar and those who are not familiar with the website in their responses to a retail
homepage.
Similarly, one of the limitations of the present study is that participants viewed the homepage
based on a ‘free browsing’ task whereby they were asked to use the website as they ‘normally
would’. However, different situations may determine the way in which customers visit this
website. For example, sometimes, they may visit the website because they need to buy a
specific product, whereas other times they may be motivated by a promotional coupon they
have received. Future research could explore whether different situations and mindsets lead
to different browsing patterns on websites.
Eye-trackers are continuously updating, thereby providing new tools that allow researchers to
statistically analyse saccades and pupil dilation. Thus, potentially using more modern
technology could provide new insights into the user journey.
Cultural differences could also be investigated as this was done on a live UK website with UK
users who read from left to right, so a comparison with users who read right to left or top to
bottom would be interesting, especially as the top left side received so much attention in the
present study.
Future research could investigate whether different types of imagery or features used on the
rotating banner and static banner images make them more engaging. The same number of
users clicked on the static banner images as the rotating banner, despite much less people
looking at it, suggesting that the features on the static banner images (specific product types)
were deemed to be more relevant and interesting than the ones on the rotating banner
(generic trends). Therefore, further research could be conducted in order to determine the
different responses to different features and imagery on the homepage.
References
Bargas-Avila, J., 2012. Users love simple and familiar designs – Why websites need to make a
great first impression. Available at: https://ai.googleblog.com/2012/08/users-love-
simple-and-familiar-designs.html
Boardman, R., McCormick, H., 2018. Shopping Channel Preferences and Usage Motivations:
Exploring Differences Amongst A 50-Year Age Span. Journal of Fashion Marketing
and Management: An International Journal. 22(2), 270-284.
Boardman, R., Mccormick, H. 2021. Attention and behaviour on fashion retail websites:
an eye-tracking study, Information Technology & People, Vol. ahead-of-print No.
ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2020-0580
Brennan, B., 2013, The Real Reason Women Shop More Than Men, Forbes. Available at:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridgetbrennan/2013/03/06/the-real-reason-women-
shop-more-than-men/?sh=781ded0e74b9
Bojko, A., 2013. Eye-tracking the user experience, Rosenfeld Media, Brooklyn, New York
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T.
Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in
psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological,
and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004
Burkolter, D., Kluge, A., 2011. Online Consumer Behavior and its Relationship With Socio-
Demographics, Shopping Orientations, Need for Emotion, and Fashion Leadership.
Journal of Business and Media Psychology. 2(2), 20–28.
Cavill, S., 2019. Women Consumers: Key Factors Marketers Need To Know To Effectively
Target This Powerful Demographic, DMS Insights, Available at:
https://insights.digitalmediasolutions.com/articles/marketing-powerful-women-
consumers
Chae, S., Lee, K., 2013. Exploring the Effect Of The Human Brand on Consumers' Decision
Quality in Online Shopping: An Eye-Tracking Approach. Online Information Review.
37(1), 83-100.
Chih-Chung, C., Chang, S., 2005. Discussion on the Behavior Intention Model of Consumer
Online Shopping. Journal of Business & Management. 11(1), 41-57.
Childers, T., Carr, C., Peck, J., Carson, S., 2001. Hedonic and Utilitarian Motivations for Online
Retail Shopping Behavior. Journal of Retailing. 77(4), 511–535.
Corbin, J., Strauss, A., 2015. Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques
and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory, 4th Edition, Sage Publications Inc, London, UK.
Cortinas, M., Cabeza, R., Chocarro, R. Villanueva, A., 2019. Attention to Online Channels
Across the Path to Purchase: An Eye-Tracking Study. Electronic Commerce Research
and Applications. 36, 100864.
Cyr, D., Head, M., Larios, H., Pan, B., 2009. Exploring Human Images in Website Design: A
Multi-Method Approach. MIS Quarterly. 33(3), 539-566.
Cyr, D., Head, M., Larios, H., 2010. Colour Appeal in Website Design Within and Across
Cultures: A Multi-Method Evaluation. International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies. 68(1–2), 1–21.
Cyr, D., Head, M., 2013. The Impact of Task Framing and Viewing Timing on User Website
Perceptions and Viewing Behaviour. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.
71(12), 1089-1102.
Djamasbi, S., Siegel M., Tullis, T., 2010. Generation Y, Web Design, and Eyetracking,
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 68(5), 307–323.
Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., Tullis T., 2011. Visual Hierarchy and Viewing Behavior: An Eye-
tracking Study, Human-Computer Interaction. Design and Development Approaches,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 67(61), 331-340.
Drèze, X., Hussherr, F. X., 2003. Internet Advertising: Is Anybody Watching?, Journal Of
Interactive Marketing. 17(4), 8-23.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P.R., 2015. Management and Business Research,
SAGE Publications Ltd, London, UK.
Econsultancy, 2021. Stats round-up: The Impact of Covid-19 on ecommerce by Lizzie Hillier,
26th July 2021. Available at: https://econsultancy.com/stats-roundup-the-impact-of-
covid-19-on-ecommerce/
Ellis, M., 2018. The Evolution of the Internet and its Impact on Retail Spaces, Wired.com.
Available at: https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/07/evolution-internet-impact-retail-
spaces/
Faraday, P., 2000. Visually Critiquing Web Pages. Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Human
Factors and the Web. pp. 1-13, Austin, Texas.
Francis, T., Hoefel, F., The influence of Gen Z—the first generation of true digital natives—is
expanding. McKinsey & Company. Available at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/our-insights/true-
gen-generation-z-and-its-implications-for-companies
Goree, S., Doosti, B., Crandall, D., Su, N., M., 2021. Investigating the Homogenization of Web
Design: A Mixed-Methods Approach, CHI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference
on Human Factors in Computing Systems, May 2021, 575, 1–14.
Hu, H., Krishen, A.S., 2019. When is Enough, Enough? Investigating Product Reviews and
Information Overload from a Consumer Empowerment Perspective, Journal of
Business Research. 100, 27-37.
Huddleston, P., Behe, B.K., Minahan, S., Fernandez, R.T., 2015. Seeking Attention: An Eye-
Tracking Study of In‐Store Merchandise Displays. International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management. 43(6), 561‐574.
Husić-Mehmedović, M., Omeragić, I., Batagelj, Z., Kolar, T. 2017. Seeing is not Necessarily
Liking: Advancing Research on Package Design with Eye-Tracking, Journal of
Business Research. 80, 145-154.
Hwang, A.D., Higgins, E.C., Pomplun, M., 2009. A Model Of Top-Down Attentional Control
During Visual Search In Complex Scenes, Journal of Vision. 9(5), 861-681.
Imamoglu, N., Shimoda, W., Zhang, C., Fang, Y., Kanezaki, A., Yanai, K., Nishida, Y., 2018. An
Integration of Bottom-Up and Top-Down Salient Cues on RGB-D Data. Signal, Image
and Video Processing. 12(2), 307-314.
Just, M.A., Carpenter, P.A., 1980. A Theory Of Reading: From Eye Fixations To Comprehension.
Psychological Review. 87(4), 329-354.
Katsuki, F., Constantinidis, C., 2014. Bottom-up and Top-Down Attention: Different Processes
and Overlapping Neural Systems. The Neuroscientist. 20(5), 509-521.
Kaushik, V., Khare, A. Boardman, R., Blazquez, M. (2020). ‘Why do online retailers succeed?
The identification and prioritization of success factors for Indian fashion retailers’,
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 39, January-February 2020,
100906: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1567422319300833
Ladouce S, Donaldson DI, Dudchenko PA and Ietswaart M (2017) Understanding Minds in Real-
World Environments: Toward a Mobile Cognition Approach. Front. Hum. Neurosci.
10:694. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00694
Lee, J., Ahn J., 2012. Attention to Banner Ads and Their Effectiveness: An Eye-Tracking
Approach. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 17(1),119–137.
Lorigo, L., Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., Joachims, T., Granka, L., Gay, G., 2006. The Influence Of
Task And Gender On Search And Evaluation Behavior Using Google. Information
Processing & Management. 42(4), 1123–1131.
Luan, J., Yao, Z., Zhao, F., Liu, H., 2016. Search Product and Experience Product Online
Reviews: An Eye-Tracking Study on Consumers’ Review Search Behaviour.
Computers in Human Behavior. 65, 420-430.
Meißner, M., Oll., J. 2019. The Promise of Eye-Tracking Methodology In Organizational
Research: A Taxonomy, Review, And Future Avenues, Organizational Research
Methods, 22(2), 590-617.
Meißner, M., Pfeiffer, J., Pfeiffer, T., Oppewal, H., 2019. Combining Virtual Reality And Mobile
Eye-Tracking To Provide A Naturalistic Experimental Environment For Shopper
Research. Journal of Business Research. 100, 445-458.
Menon, R. G. V., Sigurdsson, V., Larsen, N. M., Fagerstrøm, A., & Foxall, G. R. 2016. Consumer
Attention To Price In Social Commerce: Eye-Tracking Patterns In Retail Clothing.
Journal of Business Research, 69, 5008-5013.
Nielsen, J., Pernice, K., 2010. Eyetracking Web Usability, New Riders, Berkeley, CA.
Nielsen Norman Group, 2021. How Many Participants for Quantitative Usability Studies: A
Summary of Sample-Size Recommendations. Available at:
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/summary-quant-sample-sizes/
Olsen, A., Smolentzov, L., Strandvall, T., 2010. Comparing Different Eye-Tracking Cues When
Using The Retrospective Think-Aloud Method In Usability Testing, in Proceedings of
the 24th BCS Interaction Specialist Group Conference. 45-53, British Computer
Society, Dundee, UK.
Orquin, J. L., Mueller Loose, S., 2013. Attention and Choice: A Review on Eye Movements in
Decision Making. Acta Psychologica, 144(1), 190-206.
Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., Joachims, T., Lorigo, L., Gay, G., Granka, L., 2007. In Google We
Trust: Users’ Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication. International Communication Association. 12(3), 801–823.
Prisacari, A., Holme, T., 2013. Using Eye-Tracking to Test and Improve Website Design. Marcus,
A., (Ed.) in Design, User Experience, and Usability, Design Philosophy, Methods, and
Tool. DUXU 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 8012, 389–398, Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Rath, P.M., Bay, S., Petrizzi, R., Gill, P., 2015. The Why Of The Buy: Consumer Behaviour and
Fashion Marketing. Fairchild Books Inc., New York, NY.
Romano Bergstrom, J., Olmsted-Hawala, E., Jans, M., 2013. Age-Related Differences in Eye-
tracking and Usability Performance: Website Usability for Older Adults. International
Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 29(8), 541-548.
Romano Bergstrom, J., Schall, A.J., 2014. Eye-tracking In User Experience Design. Morgan
Kaufman, Elsevier Inc, Waltham, MA, USA.
Roth, S.P., Tuch, A.N., Mekler, E.d., Bargas-Avila, J.A., 2013. Location Matters, Especially For
Non-Salient Features-An Eye-Tracking Study On The Effects Of Web Object Placement
On Different Types Of Websites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.
71(3), pp.228-235.
Scott, G.G., Hand, C.J., 2016. Motivation Determines Facebook Viewing Strategy: An Eye
Movement Analysis. Computers in Human Behavior. 56, 267-280.
Schall, A.J., 2014. Eye-tracking Insights into Effective Navigation Design. Marcus, A. (Ed.), in
Design, User Experience, and Usability, Design Philosophy, Methods, and Tools.
DUXU 2014, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 8517, 363–370, Springer
International Publishing, Switzerland.
Shi, S., Wedel, M., Pieters, R., 2013. Information Acquisition During Online Decision Making: A
Model-Based Exploration Using Eye-Tracking Data. Management Science. 59(5),
1009–1026.
Statista, 2019. Share of Individuals Who Purchased Clothes And Sports Goods Online In Great
Britain In 2019, By Age And Gender. Available at:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/286096/clothes-and-sports-goods-online-
purchasing-in-great-britain-by-demographic/
Tarafdar, M. Zhang, J., 2007. Determinants of Reach and Loyalty- A Study of Website
Performance and Implications for Website Design. The Journal of Computer
Information Systems. 48(2), 6-24, International Association for Computer Information
Systems.
Thomas, 2018. Men aren’t willing to shop online as much as women, survey finds, CNBC.
Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/men-arent-willing-to-shop-online-as-
much-as-women-survey-finds.html
Tobii 2019. Tobii Pro Spectrum, available at: https://www.tobiipro.com/product-listing/tobii-pro-
spectrum/
Tupikovskaja-Omovie, Z. and Tyler, D. 2020. Clustering consumers' shopping journeys: eye
tracking fashion m-retail, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 24(3), 381-
398.
Tupikovskaja-Omovie, Z., Tyler, D., 2021. Eye Tracking Technology To Audit Google Analytics:
Analysing Digital Consumer Shopping Journey In Fashion M-Retail. International
Journal of Information Management, 59,102294.
Wang, Q., Yang, S., Liu, M., Cao, Z., Ma, Q., 2014. An Eye-Tracking Study Of Website
Complexity From Cognitive Load Perspective. Decision Support Systems. 62, 1-10.
Wedel, M., Pieters, R., 2008 a. A Review of Eye-Tracking Research in Marketing. in Malhotra,
N.K. (ed.). Review of Marketing Research. 4, 123–147, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited, UK.
Wedel, M., Pieters, R., 2008 b. Eye-tracking for Visual Marketing. Now Publishers Inc., The
Netherlands.
Wojdynski, B.W., Kalyanaraman, S., 2016. The three dimensions of website navigability:
explication and effects. Journal of the Association For Information Science And
Technology. 67(2), 454-464.
Yang, C., 2011. Exploring Cultural Variation in Eye Movements on a Web Page between
Americans and Koreans. in Marcus, A., (Ed.), in Design, User Experience, and
Usability, Theory, Methods, Tools and Practice, DUXU 2011, Lecture Notes on
Computer Science, 6770, 68–76, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
Zaczkiewicz, A., 2018. Survey Reveals Gender Gap Between Online and In-Store Shopping,
WWD. Available at: https://wwd.com/business-news/retail/first-insight-gender-report-
1202634109/
