The process through which an observer allocates his/her attention based on the attention of another person is known as joint attention. To be able to do this, the observer effectively has to compute where the other person is looking. It has been shown that observers integrate information from the head and the eyes to determine the gaze of another person. Most studies have documented that observers show a bias called the overshoot effect when eyes and head are misaligned. That is, when the head is not oriented straight to the observer, perceived gaze direction is sometimes shifted in the direction opposite to the head turn. The present study addresses whether body information is also used as a cue to compute perceived gaze direction. In Experiment 1, we observed a similar overshoot effect in both behavioral and saccadic responses when manipulating body orientation. In Experiment 2, we explored whether the overshoot effect was due to observers assuming that the eyes are oriented further than the head when head and body orientation are misaligned. We removed horizontal eye information by presenting the stimulus from a side view. Head orientation was now manipulated in a vertical direction and the overshoot effect was replicated. In summary, this study shows that body orientation is indeed used as a cue to determine where another person is looking.

The role of body orientation in the orienting and allocation of social attention was examined using an adapted Simon paradigm. Participants categorized the facial expression of forward facing, computer-generated human figures by pressing one of two response keys, each located left or right of the observers' body midline, while the orientation of the stimulus figure's body (trunk, arms, and legs), which was the task-irrelevant feature of interest, was manipulated (oriented toward the left or right visual hemifield) with respect to the spatial location of the required response. We found that when the orientation of the body was compatible with the required response location, responses were slower relative to when body orientation was incompatible with the response location. In line with a model put forward by Hietanen (1999), this reverse compatibility effect suggests that body orientation is automatically processed into a directional spatial code, but that this code is based on an integration of head and body orientation within an allocentric-based frame of reference. Moreover, we argue that this code may be derived from the motion information implied in the image of a figure when head and body orientation are incongruent. Our results have implications for understanding the nature of the information that affects the allocation of attention for social orienting.

Two biases in perceived gaze direction have been observed when eye and head orientation are not aligned. An overshoot effect indicates that perceived gaze direction is shifted away from head orientation (i.e., a repulsive effect), whereas a towing effect indicates that perceived gaze direction falls in between head and eye orientation (i.e., an attraction effect). In the 60s, three influential papers have been published with respect to the effect of head orientation on perceived gaze direction (Gibson and Pick, 1963; Cline, 1967; Anstis et al., 1969). Throughout the years, the results of two of these (Gibson and Pick, 1963; Cline, 1967) have been interpreted differently by a number of authors. In this paper, we critically discuss potential sources of confusion that have led to differential interpretations of both studies. At first sight, the results of Cline (1967), despite having been a major topic of discussion, unambiguously seem to indicate a towing effect whereas Gibson and Pick’s (1963) results seem to be the most ambiguous, although they have never been questioned in the literature. To shed further light on this apparent inconsistency, we repeated the critical experiments reported in both studies. Our results indicate an overshoot effect in both studies.

Object substitution masking (OSM) is a form of visual masking in which a briefly presented target surrounded by four small dots is masked by the continuing presence of the four dots after target offset. A major parameter in the prediction of OSM is the time required for attention to be directed to the target following its onset. Object substitution theory (Di Lollo et al. in J Exp Psychol Gen 129:481-507, 2000) predicts that the sooner attention can be focused at the target's location, the less masking will ensue. However, recently Luiga and Bachmann (Psychol Res 71:634-640, 2007) presented evidence that precueing of attention to the target location prior to target-plus-mask onset by means of a central (endogenous) arrow cue does not reduce OSM. When attention was cued exogenously, OSM was attenuated. Based on these results, Luiga and Bachmann argued that object substitution theory should be adapted by differentiating the ways of directing attention to the target location. The goal of the present study was to further examine the dissociation between the effects of endogenous and exogenous precueing on OSM. Contrary to Luiga and Bachmann, our results show that prior shifts of attention to the target location initiated by both exogenous and endogenous cues reduce OSM as predicted by object substitution theory and its computational model CMOS.

After decades of research, technological development as well as few discouraging setbacks, virtual reality (VR) appears to be on the cusp of its settled adoption. The incorporation of VR technology into the palette of everyday communication media is not only exciting for filmmakers and game designers, but also for every manner of storytellers: documentarians, journalists, educators, scientists – all professions involved in clarifying surrounding us reality and communicating about it. They all discovered that social change can be valuably stimulated by development of new technology – technology that serves in the same time as a classic medium to communicate and spread this news around. Considering the factors enabling us to capture and disseminate “a true story” in a highly captivating, immersive way (which previously has been preserved exclusively for entertainment and commercial productions), we should mention at least 3 crucial elements: technological innovation, psychological evolution of the viewer, application of VR beyond storytelling. The first two factors mutually interact and play off each other in terms of the changing threshold of perceptual tolerance as well as rising needs of the new spectator. The first part of this paper deals with the interdependency of these two elements. Structured conclusions will be enumerated as a practical reference for VR storytelling productions. The second part of the paper will deal with the third element enumerating the most inspiring cases from recent years – eye-openers for instigating social change, adding value and promoting wellbeing via VR technology. The engagement of VR in social change, innovation and nonfiction storytelling introduced the VR technology within the current media palette. It not only changes the nature of storytelling about reality, but fulfills the story that our reality builds.