Differences in Gaze Patterns for Facial Areas of the Asian Human Face between Female Patients Undergoing Upper Blepharoplasty and Nonoperators: An Eye-Tracking Analysis

Abstract

Introduction

Blepharoplasty's psychological effects are well-studied, but its impact on social cognition, particularly gaze behavior, remains unexplored. Understanding how cosmetic surgery alters visual attention to faces has implications for patient counseling and social interaction research.

Objectives and Hypotheses

We hypothesized that postblepharoplasty patients would exhibit altered gaze patterns, specifically increased attention to eyes due to heightened self-awareness. Primary outcomes were fixation duration and time to first fixation on facial regions.

Study Design

Case-control study (STROBE guidelines) comparing 20 females who underwent upper blepharoplasty alone with 20 nonoperated controls.

Methods

Participants viewed standardized AI-generated Asian faces while eye-tracking recorded fixation metrics. ANOVA compared groups (IRB-approved). AI was used solely for image generation.

Results

Patients after upper blepharoplasty alone showed longer eye fixation (male: p = 0.03; female: p = 0.041) and faster female eye fixation (p = 0.029). Male forehead fixation increased (p = 0.004). Other regions showed no difference.

Conclusion

Blepharoplasty modifies visual attention, potentially reflecting postsurgical self-perception changes. Findings suggest cosmetic procedures may influence social cognition.

Keywords

upper blepharoplasty - eye-tracking - visual attention - facial perception

^* These authors are co-first authors of this article.

Publication History

Accepted Manuscript online:
16 April 2025

Article published online:
15 May 2025

• References

• 1 Weykamp L, Lunos S, Ebert B, Roby BB, Chinnadurai S. Eye tracking to determine noticeability of pediatric facial scar characteristics to adult observers. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2025
• 2 Senju A, Johnson MH. The eye contact effect: mechanisms and development. Trends Cogn Sci 2009; 13 (03) 127-134
• 3 Villavisanis DF, Workman CI, Zapatero ZD. et al. Visual attention toward patients with hemifacial microsomia reconstruction: a prospective eye-tracking study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2025; 155 (02) 358e-364e
• 4 Bater KL, Ishii M, Nellis JC. et al. A dual approach to understanding facial perception before and after blepharoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2018; 20 (01) 43-49
• 5 Zoumalan CI, Roostaeian J. Simplifying blepharoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (01) 196e-213e
• 6 Akyol G, Muslu Ü, Demir E, Duran M, Gölpinar M. Quantitative evaluation of the effects of blepharoplasty on visual field, corneal changes, and cosmetic appearance. J Craniofac Surg 2024;
• 7 Hwang HS, Spiegel JH. The effect of “single” vs “double” eyelids on the perceived attractiveness of Chinese women. Aesthet Surg J 2014; 34 (03) 374-382
• 8 Sönmez MM, Solmaz IA, Ertan E. Effects of upper eyelid blepharoplasty on perceived attractiveness, success, and health. Korean J Ophthalmol 2024; 38 (06) 437-440
• 9 Hessels RS, Nuthmann A, Nyström M, Andersson R, Niehorster DC, Hooge ITC. The fundamentals of eye tracking part 1: the link between theory and research question. Behav Res Methods 2024; 57 (01) 16
• 10 Walker-Smith GJ, Gale AG, Findlay JM. Eye movement strategies involved in face perception. Perception 2013; 42 (11) 1120-1133
• 11 Cangöz B, Altun A, Aşkar P, Baran Z, Mazman SG. Examining the visual screening patterns of emotional facial expressions with gender. Age and Lateralization. 2013; 6 (04) 1-15
• 12 Bernardini F, Staiger T, Moellhoff N. et al. Facial recognition pattern before and after lower eyelid blepharoplasty: an eye tracking analysis. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2022; 30 (02) 271-276
• 13 Jankowski M, Goroncy A. Perceptive hierarchy of facial skin lesions: an eye-tracking study. Acta Derm Venereol 2022; 102: adv00799
• 14 Peterson DJ, Azad AD, Gkorila A, Patel AA, Boudreault MS, Nazerali RS. Assessing gaze patterns in common cosmetic procedures with eye-tracking technology. Ann Plast Surg 2020; 84 (5S suppl 4): S268-S272
• 15 Nummenmaa L, Calder AJ. Neural mechanisms of social attention. Trends Cogn Sci 2009; 13 (03) 135-143
• 16 Garritano FG, Quatela VC. Surgical anatomy of the upper face and forehead. Facial Plast Surg 2018; 34 (02) 109-113
• 17 Baudouin JY, Tiberghien G. Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2004; 117 (03) 313-332
• 18 Swaddle JP, Reierson GW. Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males. Proc Biol Sci 2002; 269 (1507) 2285-2289
• 19 Capitán L, Simon D, Kaye K, Tenorio T. Facial feminization surgery: the forehead. Surgical techniques and analysis of results. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (04) 609-619
• 20 Risko EF, Richardson DC, Kingstone A. Breaking the fourth wall of cognitive science. Sage J 2016; 25 (01) 70-74
• 21 Schultz J, Pilz KS. Natural facial motion enhances cortical responses to faces. Exp Brain Res 2009; 194 (03) 465-475
• 22 Bozkir E, Riedmiller C, Skodras AN, Kasneci G, Kasneci E. Can you tell real from fake face images? Perception of computer-generated faces by humans. J ACM Trans Appl Percept 2024; 22 (02) 6