ArticleScientific reports2023
Stable eye versus mouth preference in a live speech-processing task.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gaze dynamics of cued speech perception.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The right eye for fixations: Eye asymmetries modulate gaze patterns towards speakers.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- The fundamentals of eye tracking part 6: Working with areas of interest.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Visual Strategies of Avoidantly Attached Individuals: Attachment Avoidance and Gaze Behavior in Deceptive Interactions.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Influence of autistic traits and communication role on eye contact behavior during face-to-face interaction.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Looking at the mouth region is thought to be a useful strategy for speech-perception tasks. The tendency to look at the eyes versus the mouth of another person during speech processing has thus far mainly been studied using screen-based paradigms. In this study, we estimated the eye-mouth-index (EMI) of 38 adult participants in a live setting. Participants were seated across the table from an experimenter, who read sentences out loud for the participant to remember in both a familiar (English) and unfamiliar (Finnish) language. No statistically significant difference in the EMI between the familiar and the unfamiliar languages was observed. Total relative looking time at the mouth also did not predict the number of correctly identified sentences. Instead, we found that the EMI was higher during an instruction phase than during the speech-processing task. Moreover, we observed high intra-individual correlations in the EMI across the languages and different phases of the experiment. We conclude that there are stable individual differences in looking at the eyes versus the mouth of another person. Furthermore, this behavior appears to be flexible and dependent on the requirements of the situation (speech processing or not).
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.