ArticleFrontiers in psychology2012
Continuous cognitive dynamics of the evaluation of trustworthiness in williams syndrome.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Movement tracking of psychological processes: A tutorial using mousetrap.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Age Effects on Trustworthiness Activation and Trust Biases in Face Perception.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2019Article
- Older adults' neural activation in the reward circuit is sensitive to face trustworthiness.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2018Article
- Abnormalities in early visual processes are linked to hypersociability and atypical evaluation of facial trustworthiness: An ERP study with Williams syndrome.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2017Article
- More Than Meets the Eye: Split-Second Social Perception.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2016Review
- Performance on the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test-2 by Children With Williams Syndrome.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2016Article
- Autonomic response to approachability characteristics, approach behavior, and social functioning in Williams syndrome.Neuropsychologia · 2015Article
- Promoting social plasticity in developmental disorders with non-invasive brain stimulation techniques.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2015Review
- Oxytocin, vasopressin, and Williams syndrome: epigenetic effects on abnormal social behavior.Frontiers in genetics · 2015Article
- Toward a deeper characterization of the social phenotype of Williams syndrome: The association between personality and social drive.Research in developmental disabilities · 2014Article
- Innovative approaches to the study of social phenotypes in neurodevelopmental disorders: an introduction to the research topic.Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
- Abstract spatial concept priming dynamically influences real-world actions.Frontiers in psychology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The decision to approach or avoid an unfamiliar person is based in part on one's evaluation of facial expressions. Individuals with Williams syndrome (WS) are characterized in part by an excessive desire to approach people, but they display deficits in identifying facial emotional expressions. Likert-scale ratings are generally used to examine approachability ratings in WS, but these measures only capture an individual's final approach/avoid decision. The present study expands on previous research by utilizing mouse-tracking methodology to visually display the nature of approachability decisions via the motor movement of a computer mouse. We recorded mouse movement trajectories while participants chose to approach or avoid computer-generated faces that varied in terms of trustworthiness. We recruited 30 individuals with WS and 30 chronological age-matched controls (mean age = 20 years). Each participant performed 80 trials (20 trials each of four face types: mildly and extremely trustworthy; mildly and extremely untrustworthy). We found that individuals with WS were significantly more likely than controls to choose to approach untrustworthy faces. In addition, WS participants considered approaching untrustworthy faces significantly more than controls, as evidenced by their larger maximum deviation, before eventually choosing to avoid the face. Both the WS and control participants were able to discriminate between mild and extreme degrees of trustworthiness and were more likely to make correct approachability decisions as they grew older. These findings increase our understanding of the cognitive processing that underlies approachability decisions in individuals with WS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.