Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32082220›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020

A Call for the Empirical Investigation of Tear Stimuli.

Sarah J Krivan, Nicole A Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Sarah J KrivanDepartment of Psychology, Applied Attention and Perceptual Processing Laboratory, College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD, Australia.
Nicole A ThomasApplied Attention and Perceptual Processing Laboratory, School of Psychological Sciences, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emotional crying is a uniquely human behavior, which typically elicits helping and empathic responses from observers. However, tears can also be used to deceive. "Crocodile tears" are insincere tears used to manipulate the observer and foster prosocial responses. The ability to discriminate between genuine and fabricated emotional displays is critical to social functioning. When insincere emotional displays are detected, they are most often met with backlash. Conversely, genuine displays foster prosocial responses. However, the majority of crying research conducted to date has used posed stimuli featuring artificial tears. As such it is yet to be determined how the artificial nature of these displays impacts person perception. Throughout this article, we discuss the necessity for empirical investigation of the differences (or similarities) in responses to posed and genuine tearful expressions. We will explore the recent adoption of genuine stimuli in emotion research and review the existing research using tear stimuli. We conclude by offering suggestions and considerations for future advancement of the emotional crying field through investigation of both posed and genuine tear stimuli.

Indexed as

adult cryingcrocodile tearsemotionface perceptioninterpersonal communicationtear effect

Identifiers

PMID32082220
PMCPMC7005069

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.