Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31849784›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019

Body Inversion Effects With Photographic Images of Body Postures: Is It About Faces?

Emma L Axelsson, Rachel A Robbins, Helen F Copeland, Hester W Covell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Emma L AxelssonSchool of Psychology, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Rachel A RobbinsResearch School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Helen F CopelandResearch School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Hester W CovellResearch School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As with faces, participants are better at discriminating upright bodies than inverted bodies. This inversion effect is reliable for whole figures, namely, bodies with heads, but it is less reliable for headless bodies. This suggests that removal of the head disrupts typical processing of human figures, and raises questions about the role of faces in efficient body discrimination. In most studies, faces are occluded, but the aim here was to exclude faces in a more ecologically valid way by presenting photographic images of human figures from behind (about-facing), as well as measuring gaze to different parts of the figures. Participants determined whether pairs of sequentially presented body postures were the same or different for whole and headless figures. Presenting about-facing figures (heads seen from behind) and forward-facing figures with faces enabled a comparison of the effect of the presence or absence of faces. Replicating previous findings, there were inversion effects for forward-facing whole figures, but less reliable effects for headless images. There were also inversion effects for about-facing whole figures, but not about-facing headless figures. Accuracy was higher in the forward- compared to the about-facing conditions, but proportional dwell time was greater to bodies in about-facing images. Likewise, despite better discrimination of forward-facing upright compared to inverted whole figures, participants focused more on the heads and less on the bodies in upright compared to inverted images. However, there was no clear relationship between performance and dwell time proportions to heads. Body inversion effects (BIEs) were found with about-facing whole figures and headless forward-facing figures, despite the absence of faces. With inverted whole figures, there was a significant relationship between performance and greater looking at bodies, and less at heads suggesting that in more difficult conditions a focus on bodies is associated with better discrimination. Overall, the findings suggest that the visual system has greater sensitivity to bodies in their most experienced form, which is typically upright and with a head. Otherwise, the more a face is implied by the context, as in whole figures or forward- rather than about-facing headless bodies, the better the performance as holistic/configural processing is likely stronger.

Indexed as

body representationseye trackingfacesheadless bodiesinversion effects

Identifiers

PMID31849784
PMCPMC6896224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.