ArticleCognitive processing2026
Face-like cues direct attention more narrowly than arrows.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research has found that eye-gaze directs attention in a location-based manner. In contrast, arrows direct attention in an object-based manner. In the current set of experiments, we attempted to extend this basic finding in two ways. In Experiment 1, we tested whether these effects would be replicated using real-world stimuli. In Experiment 2, we tested whether the eye-gaze of a robot would direct attention in a location-based manner (like eye-gaze) or object-based manner (like arrows). Across two experiments, we replicated previous work that found eye-gaze directs attention in a location-based manner and extend this finding to the eye-gaze of a robot. However, our pattern of results for arrow cues was more complex. It appears that arrows prioritize specific locations (similar to eye-gaze) but in contrast to eye-gaze, this priority spreads to the rest of the cued object. These findings are important for understanding the role of social factors in the mechanisms underlying the gaze-cueing effect and have implications for how human-robot interactions should be designed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41060558What 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.