Pricing Cues in Digital Supplement Advertising: An Eye-Tracking Study of Visual Attention and Purchase-Intention Preferences

Authors

  • Gül Eda Burmaoğlu Department of Sports Management, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Türkiye
  • Furkan Ceviz Department of Sports Management, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Türkiye

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32479/irmm.24707

Keywords:

Eye Tracking, Psychological Pricing, Promotional Pricing, Reference Pricing, Visual Attention, Purchase-Intention Preference

Abstract

This exploratory study examined whether psychological, promotional, and reference pricing were associated with visual attention and purchase-intention preference in supplement advertisements. Forty exercisers (20 women and 20 men) viewed 12 advertisements covering arginine, creatine, branched-chain amino acids, and whey protein. For each participant and product set, the computer independently randomized the three pricing conditions. Eye movements were recorded with an SMI RED 250 eye tracker. Because participant-level gaze records were unavailable in the retained export, time to first fixation and the fixation-duration metric reported in that export were analyzed descriptively. Purchase-intention preferences were evaluated using chi-square goodness-of-fit tests and Cohen’s w. Psychological pricing showed the shortest mean time to first fixation, whereas reference pricing showed the highest aggregate fixation-duration value. Promotional pricing received the highest preference for arginine (55.0%), creatine (57.5%), and branched-chain amino acids (65.0%); psychological pricing was preferred for whey protein (82.5%). Preference distributions differed significantly from an equal distribution for all product categories, with medium-to-large or large effect sizes. Aggregate gaze patterns did not consistently correspond with product-specific preferences. The findings suggest that pricing cues may operate differently across supplement categories and that gaze indicators should not be treated as proxies for purchase-related evaluation.

Downloads

Published

2026-11-01

How to Cite

Burmaoğlu, G. E., & Ceviz, F. (2026). Pricing Cues in Digital Supplement Advertising: An Eye-Tracking Study of Visual Attention and Purchase-Intention Preferences. International Review of Management and Marketing, 17(1), 539–552. https://doi.org/10.32479/irmm.24707

Issue

Section

Articles