ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2019
The mind minds minds: The effect of intentional stance on the neural encoding of joint attention.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The influence of human agency beliefs on ascribing gaze-signalled communicative intent.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The temporal context of eye contact influences perceptions of communicative intent.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Cultural differences in joint attention and engagement in mutual gaze with a robot face.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Perceptions of intelligence & sentience shape children's interactions with robot reading companions.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evidence for the adaptive parsing of non-communicative eye movements during joint attention interactions.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Predictability modulates neural response to eye contact in ASD.Molecular autism · 2022Article
- The effect of non-communicative eye movements on joint attention.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2020Article
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
Recent neuroimaging studies have observed that the neural processing of social cues from a virtual reality character appears to be affected by "intentional stance" (i.e., attributing mental states, agency, and "humanness"). However, this effect could also be explained by individual differences or perceptual effects resulting from the design of these studies. The current study used a new design that measured centro-parietal P250, P350, and N170 event-related potentials (ERPs) in 20 healthy adults while they initiated gaze-related joint attention with a virtual character ("Alan") in two conditions. In one condition, they were told that Alan was controlled by a human; in the other, they were told that he was controlled by a computer. When participants believed Alan was human, his congruent gaze shifts, which resulted in joint attention, generated significantly larger P250 ERPs than his incongruent gaze shifts. In contrast, his incongruent gaze shifts triggered significantly larger increases in P350 ERPs than his congruent gaze shifts. These findings support previous studies suggesting that intentional stance affects the neural processing of social cues from a virtual character. The outcomes also suggest the use of the P250 and P350 ERPs as objective indices of social engagement during the design of socially approachable robots and virtual agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31243694What 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.