Literature DB >> 16615327

Faces retain attention.

Markus Bindemann1, A Mike Burton, Ignace T C Hooge, Rob Jenkins, Edward H F de Haan.   

Abstract

In the present study, we investigated whether faces have an advantage in retaining attention over other stimulus categories. In three experiments, subjects were asked to focus on a central go/no-go signal before classifying a concurrently presented peripheral line target. In Experiment 1, the go/no-go signal could be superimposed on photographs of upright famous faces, matching inverted faces, or meaningful objects. Experiments 2 and 3 tested upright and inverted unfamiliar faces, printed names, and another class of meaningful objects in an identical design. A fourth experiment provided a replication of Experiment 1, but with a 1,000-msec stimulus onset asynchrony between the onset of the central face/nonface stimuli and the peripheral targets. In all the experiments, the presence of an upright face significantly delayed target response times, in comparison with each of the other stimulus categories. These results suggest a general attentional bias, so that it is particularly difficult to disengage processing resources from faces.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16615327     DOI: 10.3758/bf03206442

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  13 in total

1.  What we see: inattention and the capture of attention by meaning.

Authors:  Arien Mack; Zissis Pappas; Michael Silverman; Robin Gay
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2002-12

2.  Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety?

Authors:  E Fox; R Russo; R Bowles; K Dutton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2001-12

3.  The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception.

Authors:  N Kanwisher; J McDermott; M M Chun
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-06-01       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention.

Authors:  N Lavie
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Anxiety and attention to threatening pictures.

Authors:  J Yiend; A Mathews
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2001-08

6.  Attentional shifts to smoking cues in smokers.

Authors:  Andrew J Waters; Saul Shiffman; Brendan P Bradley; Karin Mogg
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  A flicker paradigm for inducing change blindness reveals alcohol and cannabis information processing biases in social users.

Authors:  Barry T Jones; Ben C Jones; Helena Smith; Nicola Copley
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.526

8.  What Is Special about Face Recognition? Nineteen Experiments on a Person with Visual Object Agnosia and Dyslexia but Normal Face Recognition.

Authors:  M Moscovitch; G Winocur; M Behrmann
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.225

9.  Understanding face recognition.

Authors:  V Bruce; A Young
Journal:  Br J Psychol       Date:  1986-08

10.  Attentional bias to threat in social phobia: facilitated processing of threat or difficulty disengaging attention from threat?

Authors:  N Amir; J Elias; H Klumpp; A Przeworski
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  2003-11
View more
  50 in total

1.  Attentional capture and hold: the oculomotor correlates of the change detection advantage for faces.

Authors:  Matthew D Weaver; Johan Lauwereyns
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2010-05-11

2.  Age-Group Differences in Interference from Young and Older Emotional Faces.

Authors:  Natalie C Ebner; Marcia K Johnson
Journal:  Cogn Emot       Date:  2010-11-01

3.  Eye gaze and head orientation modulate the inhibition of return for faces.

Authors:  Adam Palanica; Roxane J Itier
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  A computer-generated animated face stimulus set for psychophysiological research.

Authors:  Adam Naples; Alyssa Nguyen-Phuc; Marika Coffman; Anna Kresse; Susan Faja; Raphael Bernier; James C McPartland
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2015-06

5.  Brief report: faces cause less distraction in autism.

Authors:  Deborah M Riby; Philippa H Brown; Nicola Jones; Mary Hanley
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2012-04

6.  Attentional capture by spatiotemporally task-irrelevant faces: supportive evidence for Sato and Kawahara (2015).

Authors:  Atsunori Ariga; Katsuhiko Arihara
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-04-28

7.  Asymmetry in Gaze Direction Discrimination Between the Upper and Lower Visual Fields.

Authors:  Adam Palanica; Roxane J Itier
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  Conscious access in the near absence of attention: critical extensions on the dual-task paradigm.

Authors:  Julian Matthews; Pia Schröder; Lisandro Kaunitz; Jeroen J A van Boxtel; Naotsugu Tsuchiya
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Faces distort eye movement trajectories, but the distortion is not stronger for your own face.

Authors:  Haoyue Qian; Xiangping Gao; Zhiguo Wang
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Top-down and bottom-up modulation in processing bimodal face/voice stimuli.

Authors:  Marianne Latinus; Rufin VanRullen; Margot J Taylor
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 3.288

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.