Literature DB >> 26582567

New perspectives in gaze sensitivity research.

Gabrielle L Davidson1,2, Nicola S Clayton3.   

Abstract

Attending to where others are looking is thought to be of great adaptive benefit for animals when avoiding predators and interacting with group members. Many animals have been reported to respond to the gaze of others, by co-orienting their gaze with group members (gaze following) and/or responding fearfully to the gaze of predators or competitors (i.e., gaze aversion). Much of the literature has focused on the cognitive underpinnings of gaze sensitivity, namely whether animals have an understanding of the attention and visual perspectives in others. Yet there remain several unanswered questions regarding how animals learn to follow or avoid gaze and how experience may influence their behavioral responses. Many studies on the ontogeny of gaze sensitivity have shed light on how and when gaze abilities emerge and change across development, indicating the necessity to explore gaze sensitivity when animals are exposed to additional information from their environment as adults. Gaze aversion may be dependent upon experience and proximity to different predator types, other cues of predation risk, and the salience of gaze cues. Gaze following in the context of information transfer within social groups may also be dependent upon experience with group-members; therefore we propose novel means to explore the degree to which animals respond to gaze in a flexible manner, namely by inhibiting or enhancing gaze following responses. We hope this review will stimulate gaze sensitivity research to expand beyond the narrow scope of investigating underlying cognitive mechanisms, and to explore how gaze cues may function to communicate information other than attention.

Keywords:  Attention attribution; Communication; Gaze aversion; Gaze following; Gaze sensitivity; Perspective taking

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26582567     DOI: 10.3758/s13420-015-0204-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Behav        ISSN: 1543-4494            Impact factor:   1.986


  48 in total

Review 1.  Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence.

Authors:  M A Elgar
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  1989-02

2.  Sleeping gulls monitor the vigilance behaviour of their neighbours.

Authors:  Guy Beauchamp
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 3.703

3.  Northern bald ibises follow others' gaze into distant space but not behind barriers.

Authors:  Matthias-Claudio Loretto; Christian Schloegl; Thomas Bugnyar
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-08-05       Impact factor: 3.703

4.  Pupils of a talking parrot.

Authors:  R Gregory; P Hopkins
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1974-12-20       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Chimpanzee gaze following in an object-choice task.

Authors:  J Call; B A Hare; M Tomasello
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2014-01-05       Impact factor: 3.084

6.  Wild robins (Petroica longipes) respond to human gaze.

Authors:  Alexis Garland; Jason Low; Nicola Armstrong; Kevin C Burns
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2014-04-27       Impact factor: 3.084

7.  Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans' attentional focus.

Authors:  Zsófia Virányi; József Topál; Márta Gácsi; Adám Miklósi; Vilmos Csányi
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2004-05-31       Impact factor: 1.777

8.  Subtle cues of predation risk: starlings respond to a predator's direction of eye-gaze.

Authors:  Julia Carter; Nicholas J Lyons; Hannah L Cole; Arthur R Goldsmith
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-08-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Modifying the object-choice task: is the way you look important for ravens?

Authors:  Christian Schloegl; Kurt Kotrschal; Thomas Bugnyar
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 1.777

10.  Body orientation and face orientation: two factors controlling apes' behavior from humans.

Authors:  Juliane Kaminski; Josep Call; Michael Tomasello
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.084

View more
  9 in total

1.  Do Carolina chickadees (Poecile carolinensis) and tufted titmice (Baeolophus bicolor) use predator eyes in risk assessment?

Authors:  Steven C Kyle
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 3.084

2.  Spatial selectivity in adaptation to gaze direction.

Authors:  Colin J Palmer; Colin W G Clifford
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 5.530

3.  Chimpanzees gesture to humans in mirrors: using reflection to dissociate seeing from line of gaze.

Authors:  Robert Lurz; Carla Krachun; Lindsay Mahovetz; McLennon J G Wilson; William Hopkins
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2017-12-26       Impact factor: 2.844

4.  The development of support intuitions and object causality in juvenile Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius).

Authors:  Gabrielle Davidson; Rachael Miller; Elsa Loissel; Lucy G Cheke; Nicola S Clayton
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Repeatable aversion across threat types is linked with life-history traits but is dependent on how aversion is measured.

Authors:  Gabrielle L Davidson; Michael S Reichert; Jodie M S Crane; William O'Shea; John L Quinn
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 2.963

6.  Watching eyes do not stop dogs stealing food: evidence against a general risk-aversion hypothesis for the watching-eye effect.

Authors:  Patrick Neilands; Rebecca Hassall; Frederique Derks; Amalia P M Bastos; Alex H Taylor
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Driving singing behaviour in songbirds using a multi-modal, multi-agent virtual environment.

Authors:  Leon Bonde Larsen; Iris Adam; Gordon J Berman; John Hallam; Coen P H Elemans
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Herring gulls respond to human gaze direction.

Authors:  Madeleine Goumas; Isabella Burns; Laura A Kelley; Neeltje J Boogert
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.703

9.  Socially induced negative affective knowledge modulates early face perception but not gaze cueing of attention.

Authors:  Magdalena Matyjek; Bartłomiej Kroczek; Magdalena Senderecka
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 4.016

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.