ArticleExperimental brain research2017
Spatial orienting of attention to social cues is modulated by cue type and gender of viewer.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beauty in the eye of the beholder: Attention to attractive faces dissociates across covert and overt measures.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Off-camera gaze decreases evaluation scores in a simulated online job interview.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Face mask reduces gaze-cueing effect.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Combining social cues in attention: Looking at gaze, head, and pointing cues.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Article
- Motion or sociality? The cueing effect and temporal course of autistic traits on gaze-triggered attention.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Different Markov chains modulate visual stimuli processing in a Go-Go experiment in 2D, 3D, and augmented reality.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Social modulators of gaze-mediated orienting of attention: A review.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020Review
- Implicit Mentalising during Level-1 Visual Perspective-Taking Indicated by Dissociation with Attention Orienting.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Across three experiments, we examined the efficacy of three cues from the human body-body orientation, head turning, and eye-gaze direction-to shift an observer's attention in space. Using a modified Posner cueing paradigm, we replicate the previous findings of gender differences in the gaze-cueing effect whereby female but not male participants responded significantly faster to validly cued than to invalidly cued targets. In contrast to the previous studies, we report a robust cueing effect for both male and female participants when head turning direction was used as the central cue, whereas oriented bodies proved ineffectual as cues to attention for both males and females. These results are discussed with reference to the time course of central cueing effects, gender differences in spatial attention, and current models of how cues from the human body are combined to judge another person's direction of attention.
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.