ArticleiScience2024
Search advantages for facing social groups reflect optimal interactive group sizes.
Article in iScience, 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.
- Shared enemies as prosocial tool: how to infer positive relationships from negative relationships in social networks.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Flexible use of quorum and numerosity principles in evaluation of social and non-social cues in group contexts.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans are sensitive to the presence of other people as well as their interactions. For example, two individuals are found faster when they face toward (vs. away from) each other. We asked if this perceptual preference for facing social groups might be modulated by group size, being most pronounced for small groups, which are most common in everyday life. In three preregistered experiments, participants searched for facing or non-facing groups, with group size varying from two to eight. Facing groups were found faster than non-facing groups but only for groups up to five people (Experiment 1). This effect replicated when controlling for the number of individuals in the displays (Experiment 2) and was reduced for displays in inverted orientations (Experiment 3). Thus, human perception seems to be well-tuned to detect interactions in small groups, which parallels social preferences in everyday life and bridges across visual perception and social cognition.
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.