Shopper eye-tracking study of point-of-sale visibility in pharmacy retail
Consumer healthcare brand selling a portfolio of over-the-counter products through pharmacy retail, seeking to understand whether its products were actually visible and competitive at the point of sale.
Confidential case study — anonymized. Full details available under NDA upon request.
Shoppers wore eye-tracking glasses shopping live at two pharmacy locations, with no prior product briefing — capturing what they noticed, in what order, and for how long.
Gaze data translated into heatmaps and a chronological attention path per location — where the visual search began, what was found, and what was missed entirely.
Findings converted into ranked merchandising actions — placement, signage, and visual cues — ordered by expected impact on visibility.
| Objective Finding | Measured Value |
|---|---|
| Client products detected within a 12-minute shelf-exposure window, Location A | 2 of 5 — the remaining 3 were never seen at any point in the session |
| First visual fixation point on entering the category, Location A | Eye-level competitor shelf |
| First visual fixation point, Location B | Competitor’s illuminated counter display, not the client’s products |
| Reason client products were noticed at all, Location B | Competitor proximity, packaging contrast, and adjacency — not a deliberate shelf strategy |
| Shelf communication elements present for client products (talkers, wobblers, visual guide), both locations | None identified |
| Locations where a competitor product was the first one seen | 2 of 2 pharmacies observed |
| Recommendation | Rationale / Expected Impact |
|---|---|
| Move the flagship product to eye level | Highest-impact single action — moves the product into the shopper’s primary decision zone |
| Add shelf talkers / wobblers at the point of sale | Creates a visual interrupt on a shelf that currently has none |
| Build a vertical visual guide down from eye level | Helps shoppers locate related products once the flagship item is found |
| Audit exact placement and facings across both store formats | Corrects the “present but not competing” gap identified at the counter display |
| Use brand blocking at high-attention zones (e.g., the counter) | Converts a zone the shopper’s eye reaches naturally into a controlled brand moment, not an accident of adjacency |
A planogram compliance check confirms a product is technically on the shelf — it does not confirm a shopper’s eye ever reaches it. Eye-tracking removed that blind spot: in both pharmacies tracked, a competitor was the first product seen, and the client’s own products were noticed only when proximity or packaging contrast happened to catch the eye — never because of a deliberate shelf strategy. That distinction is what turned a generic “improve visibility” recommendation into a ranked, location-specific action list.