Eye tracking technology for examining cognitive processes in education: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Eye-tracking studies have been increasingly used to investigate student cognitive processes. While some existing literature has reviewed commonly used eye-tracking measures and analytical methods across different contexts, there remains a gap in clarifying the educational themes, cognitive theories, and specific cognitive processes most frequently examined in recent eye-tracking studies. To address this, this review synthesizes recent educational eye-tracking research analyzing student cognitive processes from January 2012 to November 2024. In total, 313 articles were reviewed, and several main findings emerged: (1) The majority of eye-tracking studies examined the themes of multimedia learning, reading performance, and problem-solving, while fewer focused on second language learning, computer-based tests, and individual differences. (2) About half of the studies were conducted under one or more theories, with Cognitive Load Theory (CLT), Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML), and Dual-coding Theory (DCT) being the most frequently applied. (3) Eye-tracking data were primarily collected from college students, and temporal and count measures were typically used to investigate the cognitive process of information organization rather than those of information selection and integration. (4) Basic statistical methods and linear mixed models were widely used to analyze student attention differences. The results of this review provide theoretical and practical insights into the strengths and challenges of using eye-tracking technology to assess the impact of pedagogical interventions in computer-based learning environments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Eye-tracking indices such as fixation duration, fixation count, AOI dwell proportion, revisit count, and transitions across regions can reveal how attention is distributed during information search, evidential judgment, and answer construction and thereby provide process-level evidence relevant to source verification.
“These indices can reveal how attention is distributed during information search, evidential judgment, and answer construction and thereby provide process-level evidence relevant to source verification. These affordances have made eye tracking particularly useful for studying source evaluation in digital environments (Gottschling et al., 2019; Liu and Cui, 2025; Hessels et al., 2025).”
From Responsible use of generative AI in Chinese vocational education: eye-tracking evidence on source verification and immediate near-transfer across three information-seeking conditions (2026) · cites this paper as Liu and Cui, 2025
Cites
Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning
Sweller, J. (1988) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7 · Cited by 11,048 · see citing works
Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5 · Cited by 2,337 · see citing works
Bramer, W. M., Rethlefsen, M. L., Kleijnen, J., & Franco, O. H. (2017) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y · Cited by 2,114 · see citing works
Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
Mayer, R. E. (2005) · The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816819.004 · Cited by 1,602 · see citing works
The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
(2005) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816819 · Cited by 1,595 · see citing works
Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x · Cited by 1,511 · see citing works
Synthesizing Cognitive Load and Self-regulation Theory: a Theoretical Framework and Research Agenda
de Bruin, A. B. H., Roelle, J., Carpenter, S. K., Baars, M., & EFG-MRE (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09576-4 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
Cognitive Load and Working Memory in Multimedia Learning: Conceptual and Measurement Issues
Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A., & Bråten, I. (2019) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2018.1554484 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Mangaroska, K., Sharma, K., Gašević, D., & Giannakos, M. (2022) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12590 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ma, J., Yue, H., & Li, X. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1946196
- Authors
- Liu, X., & Cui, Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Xiaoxiao
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-05
- Volume
- 229
- Pages
- 105263
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4407319906
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 34 · 2025: 25
- FWCI
- 7.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers & Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435-2019-0159)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Keywords
- eye tracking, cognitive processes, educational technology, reading comprehension, attention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review