Literature DB >> 30557748

Gaze allocation in face-to-face communication is affected primarily by task structure and social context, not stimulus-driven factors.

Roy S Hessels1, Gijs A Holleman2, Alan Kingstone3, Ignace T C Hooge4, Chantal Kemner5.   

Abstract

Gaze allocation to human faces has recently been shown to be greatly dependent on the social context. However, what has not been considered explicitly here, is how gaze allocation may be supportive of the specific task that individuals carry out. In the present study, we combined these two insights. We investigated (1) how gaze allocation to facial features in face-to-face communication is dependent on the task-structure and (2) how gaze allocation to facial features is dependent on the gaze behavior of an interacting partner. To this end, participants and a confederate were asked to converse, while their eye movements were monitored using a state-of-the-art dual eye-tracking system. This system is unique in that participants can look each other directly in the eyes. We report that gaze allocation depends on the sub-task being carried out (speaking vs. listening). Moreover, we show that a confederate's gaze shift away from the participants affects their gaze allocation more than a gaze shift towards them. In a second experiment, we show that this gaze-guidance effect is not primarily stimulus-driven. We assert that gaze guidance elicited by the confederate looking away is related to the participants' sub-task of monitoring the confederate for when they can begin speaking. This study exemplifies the importance of both task structure and social context for gaze allocation during face-to-face communication.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Communication; Eye movements; Face-to-face; Faces; Gaze allocation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30557748     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.12.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  15 in total

1.  Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline.

Authors:  Kenneth Holmqvist; Saga Lee Örbom; Ignace T C Hooge; Diederick C Niehorster; Robert G Alexander; Richard Andersson; Jeroen S Benjamins; Pieter Blignaut; Anne-Marie Brouwer; Lewis L Chuang; Kirsten A Dalrymple; Denis Drieghe; Matt J Dunn; Ulrich Ettinger; Susann Fiedler; Tom Foulsham; Jos N van der Geest; Dan Witzner Hansen; Samuel B Hutton; Enkelejda Kasneci; Alan Kingstone; Paul C Knox; Ellen M Kok; Helena Lee; Joy Yeonjoo Lee; Jukka M Leppänen; Stephen Macknik; Päivi Majaranta; Susana Martinez-Conde; Antje Nuthmann; Marcus Nyström; Jacob L Orquin; Jorge Otero-Millan; Soon Young Park; Stanislav Popelka; Frank Proudlock; Frank Renkewitz; Austin Roorda; Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck; Bonita Sharif; Frederick Shic; Mark Shovman; Mervyn G Thomas; Ward Venrooij; Raimondas Zemblys; Roy S Hessels
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-04-06

2.  Selective visual attention during public speaking in an immersive context.

Authors:  Mikael Rubin; Sihang Guo; Karl Muller; Ruohan Zhang; Michael J Telch; Mary M Hayhoe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Task-related gaze control in human crowd navigation.

Authors:  Roy S Hessels; Andrea J van Doorn; Jeroen S Benjamins; Gijs A Holleman; Ignace T C Hooge
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Facetime vs. Screentime: Gaze Patterns to Live and Video Social Stimuli in Adolescents with ASD.

Authors:  R B Grossman; E Zane; J Mertens; T Mitchell
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Contextually-Based Social Attention Diverges across Covert and Overt Measures.

Authors:  Effie J Pereira; Elina Birmingham; Jelena Ristic
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2019-06-10

6.  The 'Real-World Approach' and Its Problems: A Critique of the Term Ecological Validity.

Authors:  Gijs A Holleman; Ignace T C Hooge; Chantal Kemner; Roy S Hessels
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-04-30

7.  Eye tracking in developmental cognitive neuroscience - The good, the bad and the ugly.

Authors:  Roy S Hessels; Ignace T C Hooge
Journal:  Dev Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 6.464

8.  The impact of slippage on the data quality of head-worn eye trackers.

Authors:  Diederick C Niehorster; Thiago Santini; Roy S Hessels; Ignace T C Hooge; Enkelejda Kasneci; Marcus Nyström
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-06

9.  Implying social interaction and its influence on gaze behavior to the eyes.

Authors:  Gijs A Holleman; Roy S Hessels; Chantal Kemner; Ignace T C Hooge
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  No preference for direct versus averted gaze in autistic adults: a reinforced preferential looking paradigm.

Authors:  Elise Clin; Pauline Maes; Fanny Stercq; Mikhail Kissine
Journal:  Mol Autism       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 7.509

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.