Currently accepted at: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Apr 11, 2026
Date Accepted: Oct 13, 2026
This paper has been accepted and is currently in production.
It will appear shortly on 10.2196/97904
The final accepted version (not copyedited yet) is in this tab.
Eye-Tracking in the Evaluation of Misinformation and Fake News: A Scoping Review
ABSTRACT
Background:
The proliferation of fake news, including health misinformation, poses societal risks, yet approaches to studying how individuals process and identify it remain limited in speed, scalability, and objectivity. Eye-tracking offers a promising complement, revealing real-time visual attention patterns that reflect cognitive and affective processes during news consumption.
Objective:
The primary objective of this scoping review is to examine the existing literature on the relationship between eye-tracking measures and fake news evaluation and detection.
Methods:
We synthesised findings from 25 studies published between 2017 and 2025, following the PRISMA-ScR framework.
Results:
We identified key eye-tracking metrics (particularly fixation measures, pupillometry, and saccadic activity) and methodological trends (predominantly lab-based studies using simulated social media content). The most consistent pattern was that attention to diagnostic cues such as source information, metadata, and design features was associated with fake-news evaluation and, in some studies, more accurate detection, suggesting that where attention is directed matters more than how much is deployed. Findings on overall fixation duration and count were mixed, likely reflecting variability in stimulus format and complexity. Pupillary responses showed direction-dependent effects varying with stimulus emotionality, source credibility, and task demands, appearing to track cognitive effort rather than veracity itself. Critically, we identified persistent gaps that constrain the field: the absence of standardised eye-tracking protocols, limited ecological validity, narrow participant demographics, inconsistent stimulus design, and an overreliance on cognitive theories. These limitations hinder cross-study comparability and the development of generalisable models.
Conclusions:
By integrating fragmented evidence, this review outlines recommendations for interdisciplinary theoretical integration and ecologically valid designs, underscoring the potential of eye-tracking as a methodological and theoretical lens for digital health and misinformation research. Clinical Trial: -
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.