Does eye-tracking have an effect on economic behavior?

Eye-tracking is becoming an increasingly popular tool for understanding the underlying behavior driving human decisions. However, an important unanswered methodological question is whether the use of an eye-tracking device itself induces changes in participants' behavior. We study this question using eight popular games in experimental economics chosen for their varying levels of theorized susceptibility to social desirability bias. We implement a simple between-subject design where participants are randomly assigned to either a control or an eye-tracking treatment. In seven of the eight games, eye-tracking did not produce different outcomes. In the Holt and Laury risk assessment (HL), subjects with multiple calibration attempts demonstrated more risk averse behavior in eye-tracking conditions. However, this effect only appeared during the first five (of ten) rounds. Because calibration difficulty is correlated with eye-tracking data quality, the standard practice of removing participants with low eye-tracking data quality resulted in no difference between the treatment and control groups in HL. Our results suggest that experiments may incorporate eye-tracking equipment without inducing changes in the economic behavior of participants, particularly after observations with low quality eye-tracking data are removed.

How Consistent Are Consumers in Their Decisions? Investigation of Houseplant Purchasing.

This paper examines the impact of intrinsic consumer attributes on decision consistency in houseplant purchasing intentions. Subjects reported their likelihood to buy (LTB) for themselves and as a gift at perceived bargain and getting expensive price levels. The sample was analyzed according to those who switched their LTB ratings to relatively lower values versus subjects who did not by using their demographic characteristics and responses to plant buying behavior questions. Secondly, subjects who had high initial purchase intents were analyzed versus those who had low initial purchase intents. The results indicate that inconsistent purchase decisions are more likely to occur at the perceived getting expensive price level than the perceived bargain price points. Additionally, there are very few demographic differences among the plant buyers who are consistent with their purchase intent versus inconsistent, indicating that external environmental cues may have more of an influence on purchase consistency than intrinsic cues. This information can be utilized by greenhouse and retail firms to understand when a consumer is less likely to change their plant purchase decision with a high initial intent. These price points can help firms optimize their current price offerings within the market and create dialogues with partnering box stores.