The look of love: Gaze shifts modulate perceptions of attractiveness

Mason, Malia F.; Macrae, C. Neil; Tatkow, Elizabeth

doi:10.1037/e633912013-450

Cited by 94 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings for integration of gaze direction and sexual dimorphism of 2-D face shape when perceiving the dominance of others complement previous findings for judgments of attractiveness, whereby attractiveness judgments were influenced by interactions between gaze direction and physical facial cues (eg attractive colour and texture cuesöJones et al 2006; sex of face judgedöConway et al 2008a; Mason et al 2005). Additionally, our findings complement previous studies showing that direct gaze increases attributions of anger to faces (Adams and Kleck 2005) and that viewers are more sensitive to sexually dimorphic cues when judging the sex of faces with direct gaze than when judging the sex of faces with averted gaze (Macrae et al 2002).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 39%

Integrating Gaze Direction and Sexual Dimorphism of Face Shape When Perceiving the Dominance of Others

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe majority of studies of facial attractiveness have emphasised the importance of physical characteristics, such as sexual dimorphism of face shape, symmetry and averageness (see Fink and Penton-Voak 2002 and Rhodes 2006 for reviews). More recent studies, however, have demonstrated that facial attractiveness is influenced by interactions between relatively invariant physical cues in faces and more changeable social signals, such as gaze direction (Conway et al 2008a(Conway et al , 2008bJones et al 2006;Kampe et al 2001). For example, Jones et al (2006) found that preferences for attractive colour and texture cues were stronger when judging the attractiveness of faces that were smiling at the viewer than when judging faces that were looking at the viewer with a neutral expression or that were looking away from the viewer. Additionally, neurobiological evidence suggests that direct gaze increases the reward value of attractive faces (ie the extent to which viewing attractive faces causes activity in brain regions associated with processing rewards), but not of relatively unattractive faces (Kampe et al 2001). Other recent studies have shown that perceiver-directed smiles are considered more attractive from opposite-sex individuals than own-sex individuals (Conway et al 2008a) and from healthy-looking, attractive individuals than relatively unhealthy-looking, unattractive individuals (Conway et al 2008b). While these studies demonstrate interactions between gaze direction and physical characteristics in faces when perceiving the attractiveness of others, it is not known whether similar interactions occur for other types of social attribution, such as dominance.Perceptions Abstract. Although gaze direction and face shape have each been shown to affect perceptions of the dominance of others, the question whether gaze direction and face shape have independent main effects on perceptions of dominance, and whether these effects interact, has not yet been studied. To investigate this issue, we compared dominance ratings of faces with masculinised shapes and direct gaze, masculinised shapes and averted gaze, feminised shapes and direct gaze, and feminised shapes and averted gaze. While faces with direct gaze were generally rated as more dominant than those with averted gaze, this effect of gaze direction was greater when judging faces with masculinised shapes than when judging faces with feminised shapes. Additionally, faces with masculinised shapes were rated as more dominant than those with feminised shapes when faces were presented with direct gaze, but not when faces were presented with averted gaze. Collectively, these findings reveal an interaction between the effects of gaze direction and sexually dimorphic facial cues on judgments of the dominance of others, presenting novel evidence for the existence of complex integrative processes that underpin social perception of faces. Integrating information from face shape and gaze cues may increase the efficiency with which we perceive the dominance of others.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 39%

Integrating Gaze Direction and Sexual Dimorphism of Face Shape When Perceiving the Dominance of Others

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, in many of these studies (i.e., Conty et al, 2007;Mason et al, 2005;Sato et al, 2008;Schilbach et al, 2006) discrimination of gaze direction or some other explicit task related to face categorization was employed. In our aforementioned studies, instead, the faces were observed without a concomitant task Pönkänen et al, in press;Pönkänen et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The observer observed: Frontal EEG asymmetry and autonomic responses differentiate between another person's direct and averted gaze when the face is seen live

Pönkänen

Peltola

Hietanen

2011

International Journal of Psychophysiology

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, we showed that another person's gaze direction influenced the perceiver's frontal EEG asymmetry and autonomic arousal in response to freely viewed real faces, but not in response to face pictures. However, the lack of a task during the viewing may have resulted in less attention allocation to face pictures vs. live faces. In the present study, the participants performed two online tasks while viewing the faces presented live through an electronic shutter and as pictures on a computer screen. The results replicated those from our previous experiment showing that direct gaze elicited greater relative left-sided frontal EEG asymmetry and autonomic arousal than averted gaze but, again, only in the live condition. However, the results also showed that two live stimulus faces (male and female) elicited differential EEG asymmetry responses in our participants (all females), and the effects of gaze direction were observed only for the (live) female faces. The results suggest that the discriminative responses to live faces vs. pictures are likely to reflect the participants' enhanced mental-state attributions and self-awareness when looking at and being looked by live faces. Thus, the motivation-and affect-related psychophysiological responses to gaze direction are most discriminative in the presence of another person, regardless of whether the face/gaze is actively monitored or not.

show abstract

Section: Preferential Attention To the Eyes Of Ingroup Membersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the eyes contain information that allows us to better identify and recognize specific individuals (McKelvie, 1976). They also provide valuable information about the direction of a person's visual attention which has critical implications for understanding intentions, preferences, and approach-avoidance behaviors (Adams & Kleck, 2003Hietanen, Leppänen, Peltola, Linna-Aho, & Ruuhiala, 2008;Itier & Batty, 2009;Mason, Hood, & Macrae, 2004;Mason, Tatkow, & Macrae, 2005).The above research indicates that attending to the eyes can help us form impressions and regulate social interactions (Frischen, Bayliss, & Tipper, 2007;Kleinke, 1986;Nummenmaa, Hyönä, & Heitanen, 2009;Richmond, McCroskey, & Hickson, 2007;Wirth, Sacco, Hugenberg, & Williams, 2010). Recent work, however, has also demonstrated that individuals who do not preferentially attend to others' faces and eyes commonly experience social (Yardley, McDermott, Pisarski, Duchaine, & Nakayama, 2008) and developmental deficits (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Hill, Raste, & Plumb, 2001;Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, & Jolliffe, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An eye for the I: Preferential attention to the eyes of ingroup members.

Kawakami¹,

Williams²,

Sidhu³

et al. 2014

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human faces, and more specifically the eyes, play a crucial role in social and nonverbal communication because they signal valuable information about others. It is therefore surprising that few studies have investigated the impact of intergroup contexts and motivations on attention to the eyes of ingroup and outgroup members. Four experiments investigated differences in eye gaze to racial and novel ingroups using eye tracker technology. Whereas Studies 1 and 3 demonstrated that White participants attended more to the eyes of White compared to Black targets, Study 2 showed a similar pattern of attention to the eyes of novel ingroup and outgroup faces. Studies 3 and 4 also provided new evidence that eye gaze is flexible and can be meaningfully influenced by current motivations. Specifically, instructions to individuate specific social categories increased attention to the eyes of target group members. Furthermore, the latter experiments demonstrated that preferential attention to the eyes of ingroup members predicted important intergroup biases such as recognition of ingroup over outgroup faces (i.e., the Own Race Bias; Study 3) and willingness to interact with outgroup members (Study 4). The implication of these findings for general theorizing on face perception, individuation processes, and intergroup relations are discussed.Keywords: intergroup bias, social categorization, individuation, prejudice, Own Race Bias, face perception, social vision PREFERENTIAL ATTENTION TO THE EYES OF INGROUP MEMBERS 3An Eye for the I: Preferential Attention to the Eyes of Ingroup MembersThe human face is arguably the most important of all social stimuli because it is such a rich source of information. Faces, and more specifically the eyes, play crucial roles in social and nonverbal communication, signaling valuable information about others (Adams & Kleck, 2003Niedenthal, Mermillod, Maringer, & Hess, 2010). Despite the key role that the eyes play in social cognition, few studies have investigated the impact of intergroup contexts and motivation on attention to the eyes of ingroup and outgroup members. Although research has convincingly demonstrated that perceivers are better at understanding and extracting information from faces that belong to ingroups relative to outgroups (Adams, Franklin, Nelson, & Stevenson, 2010;Chiao et al., 2008;, it remains unclear how people process faces from their own and other categories and whether distinct patterns of attention to specific facial features exist for these groups.The current research seeks to address this gap directly. To this end, we first provide a general review of the literature regarding the central role of the eyes in social perception, and in particular, their role when perceiving ingroup and outgroup members. Then we move to a discussion regarding the impact of motivation on eye gaze and the relationship between eye gaze, and two important intergroup biases: the Own Race Bias (Hugenberg, Young, Bernstein, & Sacco, 2010;Meissner & Brigham, 2001;Sporer, 2001) and a willing...

show abstract

The look of love: Gaze shifts modulate perceptions of attractiveness

Cited by 94 publications

References 0 publications

Integrating Gaze Direction and Sexual Dimorphism of Face Shape When Perceiving the Dominance of Others

Integrating Gaze Direction and Sexual Dimorphism of Face Shape When Perceiving the Dominance of Others

The observer observed: Frontal EEG asymmetry and autonomic responses differentiate between another person's direct and averted gaze when the face is seen live

An eye for the I: Preferential attention to the eyes of ingroup members.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About