Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40785779›Full record

ArticleGroup processes & intergroup relations : GPIR2025

An investigation of how gender shapes the appearance and judgment of apologetic faces.

Meghan George, Joshua R Guilfoyle, C Ward Struthers, Jennifer R Steele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Group processes & intergroup relations : GPIR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Meghan GeorgeYork University, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6917-6061
Joshua R GuilfoyleYork University, Canada.
C Ward StruthersYork University, Canada.
Jennifer R SteeleYork University, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2275-0446

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Do people have mental representations of what apologetic faces look like? Do representations differ by gender? We used reverse correlation to (a) generate images that approximate mental representations of apologetic faces, (b) determine whether these images are rated highly on apology-related characteristics, and (c) see if ratings differ by gender of the image generator, target face, and/or image rater. Faces generated from male and female base faces to look apologetic were rated as more apologetic, remorseful, and sad than the base face, demonstrating these mental representations can be approximated using reverse correlation. Findings suggest visually represented apologies express multiple apology-related characteristics. Study 2 revealed the visual templates of faces generated by the gender ingroup appeared more apologetic than those of the gender outgroup; women-generated female faces were most apologetic, and men-generated female faces were least apologetic. Findings highlight gender differences in mental representation, but not perception, of female apologetic faces.

Indexed as

apologiesface perceptiongendernonverbalreverse correlation

Identifiers

PMID40785779
PMCPMC12334083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.