ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
A competitive edge: how social cues and spatial congruence influence joint attention in addressed or witnessed interactions.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A competitive edge: how social cues and spatial congruence influence joint attention in addressed or witnessed interactions.Royal Society open science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joint attention is crucial for the development of social cognition, but whether the type of relationship (i.e. cooperative or competitive) or interaction (e.g. addressed or witnessed) modulates joint attention is unclear. This study investigated these factors in 96 neurotypical adults using a video object-choice task. Here, participants chose between cups based on an actor's pointing cue, either while being addressed or witnessing an interaction between two actors. Participants were primed about the actor's cooperative or competitive intent. Experiment 1 found no significant interaction between these factors. However, Experiment 2, considering spatial attention (cue direction), revealed nuanced effects. In addressed interactions, more social cues led to faster responses, especially during spatially congruent cooperative trials. In witnessed interactions, responses were faster to spatially incongruent cues in cooperative trials and vice versa in competitive trials. These findings suggest that joint attention is not solely a passive response to social cues, but is actively shaped by the social context and spatial configuration, highlighting how individuals actively interpret and adapt to others' attentional cues.
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.