Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36871586›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2023

How video calls affect mimicry and trust during interactions.

Fabiola Diana, Oscar E Juárez-Mora, Wouter Boekel, Ruud Hortensius, Mariska E Kret

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2023. 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. Face2face: advancing the science of social interaction.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. How video calls affect mimicry and trust during interactions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    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

5 authors.

Fabiola DianaComparative Psychology and Affective Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Cognitive Psychology, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5999-2145
Oscar E Juárez-MoraLaboratorio de Ecología de La Conducta, Instituto de Fisiología, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Puebla, Puebla 72530, Mexico.
Wouter BoekelComparative Psychology and Affective Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Cognitive Psychology, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ruud HortensiusDepartment of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mariska E KretComparative Psychology and Affective Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Cognitive Psychology, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3197-5084

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many social species, humans included, mimic emotional expressions, with important consequences for social bonding. Although humans increasingly interact via video calls, little is known about the effect of these online interactions on the mimicry of scratching and yawning, and their linkage with trust. The current study investigated whether mimicry and trust are affected by these new communication media. Using participant-confederate dyads (

Indexed as

Mass MediaTrustCuesEmotionsHumansMental Processesbehavioural mimicryscratchingtrustvideo callsyawning

Identifiers

PMID36871586
PMCPMC9985972

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.