ArticleExperimental brain research2018
Face stimulus eliminates antisaccade-cost: gaze following is a different kind of arrow.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dimensional asymmetries in social attention: Dynamic head movements elicit opposite attentional biases in vertical versus horizontal dimensions.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Social modulators of gaze-mediated orienting of attention: A review.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020Review
- Spontaneous eye-movements in neutral and emotional gaze-cuing: An eye-tracking investigation.Heliyon · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When a person suddenly looks in a certain direction, others seem to shift their attention to the same, looked-at, location. This common observation, that gaze-of-another seems to trigger reflexive shifts of attention within an observer, has been demonstrated in various studies. Yet just how reflexive it truly is, is an on-going controversy. Unlike most studies in which gaze cues were distractors in a cueing paradigm, the current study used gaze cues as triggers in a mixed pro- and anti-saccade task and a Posner-like discrimination task. In a set of two experiments, we investigated whether attention triggered by gaze-of-another differs from attention triggered by peripheral (exogenous) and arrow stimuli. In the first experiment, gaze cues resulted in slowed saccadic responses and in the elimination of the anti-saccade-cost associated with reflexive orienting. Pro-saccades triggered by peripheral cues had significantly fewer errors and shorter reaction times than anti-saccades. However, there was no significant difference between pro and anti-saccades triggered by gaze cues. Thus, counter to expectations, gaze did not produce reflexive shifts of overt attention. The second experiment showed that attention triggered by gaze cues is no different from attention triggered by biologically irrelevant arrow cues. They both eliminated the anti-saccade-cost and displayed prolonged reaction times. However, manual discrimination RTs showed no significant differences between gaze and peripheral cues. Together, these results suggest that neither gaze nor arrow cues trigger reflexive shifts of overt attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29423811What 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.