ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Visual Field Restriction in the Recognition of Basic Facial Expressions: A Combined Eye Tracking and Gaze Contingency Study.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Spatial and Sequential Organization of Gaze During Facial Expression Recognition Tasks.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Distinct contributions of foveal and extrafoveal visual information to emotion judgments and gaze behavior for faces.Journal of vision · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Uncertainties and discrepant results in identifying crucial areas for emotional facial expression recognition may stem from the eye tracking data analysis methods used. Many studies employ parameters of analysis that predominantly prioritize the examination of the foveal vision angle, ignoring the potential influences of simultaneous parafoveal and peripheral information. To explore the possible underlying causes of these discrepancies, we investigated the role of the visual field aperture in emotional facial expression recognition with 163 volunteers randomly assigned to three groups: no visual restriction (NVR), parafoveal and foveal vision (PFFV), and foveal vision (FV). Employing eye tracking and gaze contingency, we collected visual inspection and judgment data over 30 frontal face images, equally distributed among five emotions. Raw eye tracking data underwent Eye Movements Metrics and Visualizations (EyeMMV) processing. Accordingly, the visual inspection time, number of fixations, and fixation duration increased with the visual field restriction. Nevertheless, the accuracy showed significant differences among the NVR/FV and PFFV/FV groups, despite there being no difference in NVR/PFFV. The findings underscore the impact of specific visual field areas on facial expression recognition, highlighting the importance of parafoveal vision. The results suggest that eye tracking data analysis methods should incorporate projection angles extending to at least the parafoveal level.
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.