Literature DB >> 22686696

A new look at social attention: orienting to the eyes is not (entirely) under volitional control.

Kaitlin E W Laidlaw1, Evan F Risko, Alan Kingstone.   

Abstract

People tend to look at other people's eyes, but whether this bias is automatic or volitional is unclear. To discriminate between these two possibilities, we used a "don't look" (DL) paradigm. Participants looked at a series of upright or inverted faces, and were asked either to freely view the faces or to avoid looking at the eyes, or as a control, the mouth. As previously demonstrated, participants showed a bias to attend to both eyes and mouths during free viewing. In the DL condition, participants told to avoid the eyes of upright faces were unable to fully suppress the tendency to fixate on the faces' eyes, whereas participants told to avoid the mouth of upright faces successfully eliminated their bias to overtly attend to that feature. When faces were inverted, participants were equally able to suppress looks to the eyes and mouth. Together, these results suggest that the tendency to look at the eyes reflects orienting that is both volitional and automatic, and that the engagement of holistic or configural face processing mechanisms during upright face viewing has an influence in guiding gaze automatically to the eyes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22686696     DOI: 10.1037/a0027075

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  17 in total

1.  Age-related differences in alcohol attention bias: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Annie Melaugh McAteer; Donncha Hanna; David Curran
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2018-06-09       Impact factor: 4.530

2.  Conceptualizing Social Attention in Developmental Research.

Authors:  Brenda Salley; John Colombo
Journal:  Soc Dev       Date:  2015-12-29

3.  Alcohol attention bias in adolescent social drinkers: an eye tracking study.

Authors:  Annie Melaugh McAteer; David Curran; Donncha Hanna
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 4.530

4.  Foveal processing of emotion-informative facial features.

Authors:  Nazire Duran; Anthony P Atkinson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Social attention with real versus reel stimuli: toward an empirical approach to concerns about ecological validity.

Authors:  Evan F Risko; Kaitlin Laidlaw; Megan Freeth; Tom Foulsham; Alan Kingstone
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  The impact of facial abnormalities and their spatial position on perception of cuteness and attractiveness of infant faces.

Authors:  Jennifer Lewis; Debi Roberson; Tom Foulsham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The "Social Gaze Space": A Taxonomy for Gaze-Based Communication in Triadic Interactions.

Authors:  Mathis Jording; Arne Hartz; Gary Bente; Martin Schulte-Rüther; Kai Vogeley
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-02-26

8.  What affects social attention? Social presence, eye contact and autistic traits.

Authors:  Megan Freeth; Tom Foulsham; Alan Kingstone
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Importance of the inverted control in measuring holistic face processing with the composite effect and part-whole effect.

Authors:  Elinor McKone; Anne Aimola Davies; Hayley Darke; Kate Crookes; Tushara Wickramariyaratne; Stephanie Zappia; Chiara Fiorentini; Simone Favelle; Mary Broughton; Dinusha Fernando
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-02-04

10.  Motion influences gaze direction discrimination and disambiguates contradictory luminance cues.

Authors:  Nicola C Anderson; Evan F Risko; Alan Kingstone
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.