ArticleScientific reports2020
Incidental learning of group trust: Predictive gaze cue matters.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. 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, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- The spatial distance compression effect is due to social interaction and not mere configuration.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Article
- Influences of eye gaze cues on memory and its mechanisms: The function and evolution of social attention.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Review
- Standing out from the crowd: Both cue numerosity and social information affect attention in multi-agent contexts.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human gaze is a subtle cue to deliver information and helps impression formation in social interactions. People automatically follow the gaze direction of others and shift their attention accordingly, as well as determine the trustworthiness of others based on the predictable validity of their gaze behavior, yet it remains unclear how this works at the collective level. Therefore, the current study is the first to explore the incidental learning of trust from a group's gaze behavior. To simulate different patterns of perceiving collective information in real life, two ways of presenting group member gazes were used in the object categorization task, the simultaneous way in Experiment 1 and the sequential way in Experiment 3, and a sampling strategy was ruled out in Experiment 2. Converging findings in experiments demonstrated a typical gaze-cueing effect, and more importantly, the Predictive-valid group obtained more trust compared to the Predictive-invalid group. To enrich and expand the applicability of the incidental trust learning effect from gazes, the current study provides supportive evidence at the collective level, confirming that humans have an efficient capability to process gaze information of groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.