Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29799093›Full record

SynthesisPsychonomic bulletin & review2018

Self-face advantage over familiar and unfamiliar faces: A three-level meta-analytic approach.

Catherine Bortolon, Stéphane Raffard

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Does an experimentally induced self-association elicit affective self-prioritisation?Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Equivalent own name bias in autism: An EEG study of the Attentional Blink.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Catherine BortolonEpsylon Laboratory, EA 4556, Montpellier, France. catherine.bortolon@gmail.com.
Stéphane RaffardEpsylon Laboratory, EA 4556, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the increasing number of researchers interested in self-face, so far, no study has summarized the behavioral findings that contribute to the debate on self-face advantage. Most studies have focused on neural correlates of the self, although functional uniqueness can also be considered an important criterion for determining whether a stimulus is unique. The present meta-analysis systematically compared reaction time (RT) responses for self-face with other face identities across 54 studies. Different moderator factors were tested: familiarity, identity, head angle, laterality, and culture. We used a three-level meta-analytic approach, which is the best approach to account for the dependency of effect sizes. Results showed a significant (Hedges's g

Indexed as

CultureEgoSocial PerceptionFacial RecognitionHumansReaction TimeRecognition, PsychologyFace recognitionMeta-analysisReaction timeSelf-advantageSelf-face

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.