ArticleVision (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Influence of Competing Social and Symbolic Cues on Observers' Gaze Behaviour.
Article in Vision (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The effects of social (eye gaze, pointing gestures) and symbolic (arrows) cues on observers' attention are often studied by presenting such cues in isolation and at fixation. Here, we extend this work by embedding cues in natural scenes. Participants were presented with a single cue (Experiment 1) or a combination of cues (Experiment 2) embedded in natural scenes and were asked to 'simply look at the images' while their eye movements were recorded to assess the effects of the cues on (overt) attention. Single-gaze and pointing cues were fixated for longer than arrows but at the cost of shorter dwell times on the cued object. When presented together, gaze and pointing cues were fixated faster and for longer than simultaneously presented arrows. Attention to the cued object depended on the combination of cues and whether both cues were directed towards or away from the target object. Together, the findings confirm earlier observations that people attract attention more strongly than arrows but that arrows more strongly direct attention.
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.