ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024
A preference to look closer to the eyes is associated with a position-invariant face neural code.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learned foveal representations, not gaze-mediated information access, underlie perceptual advantages for canonical face configurations.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Preferred fixation position and gaze location: Two factors modulating the composite face effect.Journal of vision · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When looking at faces, humans invariably move their eyes to a consistent preferred first fixation location on the face. While most people have the preferred fixation location just below the eyes, a minority have it between the nose-tip and mouth. Not much is known about whether these long-term differences in the preferred fixation location are associated with distinct neural representations of faces. To study this, we used a gaze-contingent face adaptation aftereffect paradigm to test in two groups of observers, one with their mean preferred fixation location closer to the eyes (upper lookers) and the other closer to the mouth (lower lookers). In this task, participants were required to maintain their gaze at either their own group's mean preferred fixation location or that of the other group during adaptation and testing. The two possible fixation locations were 3.6° apart on the face. We measured the face adaptation aftereffects when the adaptation and testing happened while participants maintained fixation at either the same or different locations on the face. Both groups showed equally strong adaptation effects when the adaptation and testing happened at the same fixation location. Crucially, only the upper lookers showed a partial transfer of the FAE across the two fixation locations, when adaptation occurred at the eyes. Lower lookers showed no spatial transfer of the FAE irrespective of the adaptation position. Given the classic finding that neural tuning is increasingly position invariant as one moves higher in the visual hierarchy, this result suggests that differences in the preferred fixation location are associated with distinct neural representations of faces.
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.