Literature DB >> 25506126

Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces.

Karl F MacDorman1, Robert D Green1, Chin-Chang Ho1, Clinton T Koch1.   

Abstract

As virtual humans approach photorealistic perfection, they risk making real humans uncomfortable. This intriguing phenomenon, known as the uncanny valley, is well known but not well understood. In an effort to demystify the causes of the uncanny valley, this paper proposes several perceptual, cognitive, and social mechanisms that have already helped address riddles like empathy, mate selection, threat avoidance, cognitive dissonance, and psychological defenses. In the four studies described herein, a computer generated human character's facial proportions, skin texture, and level of detail were varied to examine their effect on perceived eeriness, human likeness, and attractiveness. In Study I, texture photorealism and polygon count increased human likeness. In Study II, texture photorealism heightened the accuracy of human judgments of ideal facial proportions. In Study III, atypical facial proportions were shown to be more disturbing on photorealistic faces than on other faces. In Study IV, a mismatch in the size and texture of the eyes and face was especially prone to make a character eerie. These results contest the depiction of the uncanny valley as a simple relation between comfort level and human likeness. This paper concludes by introducing a set of design principles for bridging the uncanny valley.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anthropomorphism; Facial perception; Masahiro Mori; Social cognitive neuroscience; Uncanny valley

Year:  2009        PMID: 25506126      PMCID: PMC4264966          DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Human Behav        ISSN: 0747-5632


  46 in total

1.  Facial attractiveness.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 2.  The amygdala: vigilance and emotion.

Authors:  M Davis; P J Whalen
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 15.992

3.  Vase or face? A neural correlate of shape-selective grouping processes in the human brain.

Authors:  U Hasson; T Hendler; D Ben Bashat; R Malach
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Neural mechanisms of empathy in humans: a relay from neural systems for imitation to limbic areas.

Authors:  Laurie Carr; Marco Iacoboni; Marie-Charlotte Dubeau; John C Mazziotta; Gian Luigi Lenzi
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-04-07       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  How distributed is visual category information in human occipito-temporal cortex? An fMRI study.

Authors:  Mona Spiridon; Nancy Kanwisher
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2002-09-12       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Is face recognition not so unique after all?

Authors:  I Gauthier; N K Logothetis
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex.

Authors:  J V Haxby; M I Gobbini; M L Furey; A Ishai; J L Schouten; P Pietrini
Journal:  Science       Date:  2001-09-28       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  First impressions: making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face.

Authors:  Janine Willis; Alexander Todorov
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-07

9.  Evidence for adaptive design in human gaze preference.

Authors:  C A Conway; B C Jones; L M DeBruine; A C Little
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Spared ability to recognise fear from static and moving whole-body cues following bilateral amygdala damage.

Authors:  Anthony P Atkinson; Andrea S Heberlein; Ralph Adolphs
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2007-05-06       Impact factor: 3.139

View more
  50 in total

1.  Monkey visual behavior falls into the uncanny valley.

Authors:  Shawn A Steckenfinger; Asif A Ghazanfar
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  You can take the eyes out of the doll, but....

Authors:  Benjamin Balas; Joseph Horski
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.490

3.  Why Some Humanoid Faces Are Perceived More Positively Than Others: Effects of Human-Likeness and Task.

Authors:  Akanksha Prakash; Wendy A Rogers
Journal:  Int J Soc Robot       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 5.126

4.  Social robotics and the modulation of social perception and bias.

Authors:  Joshua Skewes; David M Amodio; Johanna Seibt
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  The development of the uncanny valley in infants.

Authors:  David J Lewkowicz; Asif A Ghazanfar
Journal:  Dev Psychobiol       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 3.038

6.  Artificial faces are harder to remember.

Authors:  Benjamin Balas; Jonathan Pacella
Journal:  Comput Human Behav       Date:  2015-11-01

7.  Early visual ERP sensitivity to the species and animacy of faces.

Authors:  Benjamin Balas; Kami Koldewyn
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2013-09-14       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 8.  Comparative thanatology, an integrative approach: exploring sensory/cognitive aspects of death recognition in vertebrates and invertebrates.

Authors:  André Gonçalves; Dora Biro
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  The Uncanny Valley Does Not Interfere with Level 1 Visual Perspective Taking.

Authors:  Karl F MacDorman; Preethi Srinivas; Himalaya Patel
Journal:  Comput Human Behav       Date:  2013-07-01

10.  A non-humanoid robot in the "uncanny valley": experimental analysis of the reaction to behavioral contingency in 2-3 year old children.

Authors:  Kentaro Yamamoto; Saori Tanaka; Hiromi Kobayashi; Hideki Kozima; Kazuhide Hashiya
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.