In a study by Willian Carballo (2024) examining how young Salvadorans engage with disinformation, researchers used RealEye, an online eye-tracking tool, to monitor the visual behavior of 48 participants between the ages of 18 and 24. The study aimed to identify which elements of disinformation drew the most attention and which were overlooked, helping to reveal how certain tactics effectively mislead audiences. By tracking participants' eye movements through their webcams, RealEye provided precise, real-time data on what participants noticed when exposed to false or manipulated content.
In the first use case, participants were shown a fake news website designed to mimic "La Prensa Gráfica," one of the most recognizable Salvadoran newspapers. The website was almost identical to the real site, except for a subtle alteration in the logo where the name was changed to "Las Prensas Gráfica." RealEye revealed that participants spent an average of 5.07 seconds before they even looked at the altered logo, a critical clue that could have helped them identify the content as fake. However, only 48% of the participants noticed the logo at all. The rest of their attention was directed toward the headline and images, which absorbed most of the participants' focus. The logo garnered only 129 total fixations, compared to the 4,033 fixations on the images.
The results showed that 60% of participants believed the article to be real, highlighting how subtle manipulations like an altered logo can easily go unnoticed.
In this use case, participants were presented with a photograph of El Tunco beach, which had been digitally altered to include a protest sign. The sign criticized President Bukele, but it was a crucial element for identifying the image as fake. RealEye data showed that only 67% of participants noticed the sign, and it took them an average of 7.05 seconds to focus on it. In comparison, the main photograph attracted 11,818 fixations, while the sign received just 528 fixations. Participants focused mostly on the landscape and central elements, missing the doctored sign until much later.
46% of participants correctly identified the photo as manipulated, while 33% were unsure, showing that even when subtle cues are noticed, they are not always recognized as fakes.
In this case, participants were shown a YouTube thumbnail that falsely suggested Kim Kardashian was supporting President Bukele. The bold, colorful headline and images of Kardashian and Bukele drew immediate attention. Participants focused on the headline in just 0.96 seconds and spent an average of 2.8 seconds on it. The thumbnail attracted 6,657 fixations, with Bukele’s face receiving 1,914 fixations, and Kardashian drawing 1,107 fixations. Despite the misleading nature of the thumbnail, 96% of participants identified it as false. However, 15% indicated they would still click on the video.
Participants were shown a Twitter post featuring a manipulated photo of Daddy Yankee eating pupusas, a Salvadoran dish. The image had been photoshopped, but participants were more focused on the celebrity’s face and the attention-grabbing headline. RealEye revealed that 94% of participants viewed Daddy Yankee’s face, spending 1.9 seconds on average, while the manipulated pupusas attracted only 2,337 fixations compared to the 4,323 fixations on Daddy Yankee. Furthermore, the username "AnónimoSV503," which should have raised suspicion, was noticed by just 52% of participants, and even then, they only spent an average of 0.21 seconds on it. 46% of participants believed the post was real, demonstrating how the presence of a celebrity can distract viewers from recognizing obvious signs of manipulation.
In the final use case, participants viewed a grotesque news story claiming that zopilote (vulture) meat was being sold as chicken in a local market. The story was accompanied by graphic images of decapitated birds. RealEye showed that the disturbing images and sensational headline dominated participants’ attention. The headline received 5,207 fixations, and the image of the zopilote heads garnered 5,204 fixations, with 100% of participants viewing the image. In contrast, the source credits and publication date were mostly ignored. Surprisingly, 52% of participants thought the story was true, illustrating how shocking imagery can overwhelm critical thinking and prevent viewers from verifying the credibility of the source.
The use of RealEye in this study revealed consistent patterns in how young audiences interact with disinformation. Across all five cases, bold headlines, sensational images, and celebrity figures consistently attracted the most attention, while critical details such as altered logos, manipulated signs, and suspicious usernames were often overlooked. Disinformation creators are highly effective at using visual tactics to draw attention away from important clues that could reveal their content as false.
To counteract this, media literacy programs need to focus on teaching audiences to critically assess not just the main visuals, but also the smaller, often overlooked details. The findings from this study suggest that viewers must be trained to verify logos, examine sources, and evaluate the credibility of user accounts to better recognize disinformation.
Follow the steps below to start your own experiment with RealEye:
Account Creation and License Activation
Ready to set up your own study? Visit RealEye Support page to learn more and keep us posted on your results! 🚀
