Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36864074›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with 'sender' but not 'receiver' neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony.

I Marriott Haresign, E A M Phillips, M Whitehorn, F Lamagna, M Eliano, L Goupil, E J H Jones, S V Wass

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Brain-Behavior Associations During Interactions Between Caregivers and Infants.Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies
    Article
  14. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

I Marriott HaresignDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK. u1434978@uel.ac.uk.
E A M PhillipsDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK.
M WhitehornDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK.
F LamagnaDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK.
M ElianoDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK.
L GoupilLPNC/CNRS, Grenoble Alpes University, Grenoble, France.
E J H JonesCentre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, UK.
S V WassDepartment of Psychology, University of East London, London, E15 4LZ, UK.
University of East London · GBBirkbeck, University of London · GBUniversité Grenoble Alpes · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Temporal coordination during infant-caregiver social interaction is thought to be crucial for supporting early language acquisition and cognitive development. Despite a growing prevalence of theories suggesting that increased inter-brain synchrony associates with many key aspects of social interactions such as mutual gaze, little is known about how this arises during development. Here, we investigated the role of mutual gaze onsets as a potential driver of inter-brain synchrony. We extracted dual EEG activity around naturally occurring gaze onsets during infant-caregiver social interactions in N = 55 dyads (mean age 12 months). We differentiated between two types of gaze onset, depending on each partners' role. 'Sender' gaze onsets were defined at a time when either the adult or the infant made a gaze shift towards their partner at a time when their partner was either already looking at them (mutual) or not looking at them (non-mutual). 'Receiver' gaze onsets were defined at a time when their partner made a gaze shift towards them at a time when either the adult or the infant was already looking at their partner (mutual) or not (non-mutual). Contrary to our hypothesis we found that, during a naturalistic interaction, both mutual and non-mutual gaze onsets were associated with changes in the sender, but not the receiver's brain activity and were not associated with increases in inter-brain synchrony above baseline. Further, we found that mutual, compared to non-mutual gaze onsets were not associated with increased inter brain synchrony. Overall, our results suggest that the effects of mutual gaze are strongest at the intra-brain level, in the 'sender' but not the 'receiver' of the mutual gaze.

Indexed as

CaregiversThalamusAdultBrainCognitionHumansInfantResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID36864074
PMCPMC9981599
OpenAlexW4323036639

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.