ArticleCognitive processing2015
The politics of attention contextualized: gaze but not arrow cuing of attention is moderated by political temperament.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Sex and Gender-Role on Social Attention: Investigating the Association With Social Skills and Academic Preferences.International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie · 2026Article
- Leading through gaze: Enhanced social attention in high-rank members of a large-scale organization.iScience · 2024Article
- The who and the where: Attention to identities and locations in groups.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Social excluder's face reduces gaze-triggered attention orienting.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Individual differences in gaze-cuing effect are associated with facial emotion recognition and social conformity.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Social modulators of gaze-mediated orienting of attention: A review.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020Review
- Left Threatened by Right: Political Intergroup Bias in the Contemporary Italian Context.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Attention holding elicited by direct-gaze faces is reflected in saccadic peak velocity.Experimental brain research · 2017Article
- The appeal of the devil's eye: social evaluation affects social attention.Cognitive processing · 2017Article
- The neural basis of intergroup threat effect on social attention.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Fortunes and misfortunes of political leaders reflected in the eyes of their electors.Experimental brain research · 2016Article
- Space-based and object-centered gaze cuing of attention in right hemisphere-damaged patients.Frontiers in psychology · 2015Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is known that an averted gaze can trigger shifts of attention in an observer, a phenomenon known as gaze-cuing effect. Recently, Dodd et al. (Atten Percept Psychophys 73:24-29, 2011) have reported a reliable gaze-cuing effect for liberals but not for conservatives. The present study tested whether this result is gaze-specific or extends over nonsocial spatial signals. Conservatives and liberals took part in a spatial-cuing task in which centrally placed gaze and arrow cues, pointing rightward or leftward, were followed by a peripheral onset target requiring a simple detection response. Whereas a reliable cuing effect was present for both gaze and arrow cues in the case of liberals, conservatives showed a reduced cuing response only for gaze cues. These results provide further support for the pattern reported by Dodd et al. (2011) and are consistent with the view that conservatives are less susceptible to the influence of spatial cues provided by other individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26055660What 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.