Advertisement

Do You Trust One’s Gaze? Commonalities and Differences in Gaze-Cueing Effect Between American and Japanese

  • Saki TakaoEmail author
  • Atsunori Ariga
  • Yusuke Yamani
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9741)

Abstract

Direction of others’ gaze can guide one’s attentional orientation, an effect called the gaze-cueing effect. The present study examined relationships between the gaze-cueing effect and general trust (i.e., a cognitive bias in benevolence of human nature) across participants in the United States and Japan. American participants voluntarily followed the non-predictive cueing gaze irrespective of their general trust, while Japanese participants voluntarily ignored the gaze in response to the levels of their general trust. These results were largely consistent with the previous suggestion that Westerners tend to focus on an object independent of its context while Asians tend to attend the context and implies that individuals’ general trust levels may modulate early-stage visual processing such as detecting a visual object.

Keywords

Gaze cueing effect General trust Visual attention Cultural difference 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Grant-in-Aid for challenging Exploratory Research (#26590075), the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science to AA. Correspondence should be addressed to S. Takao, Department of Psychology, Rissho University, 4-2-16 Osaki, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo 141-8602, Japan (e-mail: s08013477615@gmail.com).

References

  1. 1.
    Ariga, A., Watanabe, K.: What is special about the index finger?: the index finger advantage in manipulating reflexive attentional shift. Jpn. Psychol. Res. 51, 258–265 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Driver, J., Davis, G., Ricciardelli, P., Kidd, P., Maxwell, E., Baron-Cohen, S.: Gaze perception triggers reflexive visuospatial orienting. Visual Cogn. 6, 509–540 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Friesen, C.K., Kingstone, A.: The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 5, 490–495 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kingstone, A., Friesen, C.K., Gazzaniga, M.S.: Reflexive joint attention depends on lateralized cortical connections. Psychol. Sci. 11, 159–166 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Langton, S.R.H., Bruce, V.: Reflexive visual orienting in response to the social attention of others. Visual Cogn. 6, 541–567 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Langton, S.R.H., Bruce, V.: You must see the point: automatic processing of cue to the direction of social attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 26, 747–757 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Langton, S.R.H., Watt, R.J., Bruce, V.: Do the eyes have it?: cues to the direction of social attention. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4, 50–59 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bayliss, A.P., Frischen, A., Fenske, M.J., Tipper, S.P.: Affective evaluations of objects are influenced by observed gaze direction and emotional expression. Cognition 104, 644–653 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yamagishi, T., Yamagishi, M.: Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motiv. Emot. 18, 129–166 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garske, J.P.: Interpersonal trust and construct complexity for positively and negatively evaluated persons. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1, 616–619 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Posner, M.I., Cohen, Y.: Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma, H., Bouwhuis, D.G. (eds.) Attention and Performance X, pp. 55–66. Erlbaum, Hillside (1984)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yantis, S.: Stimulus-driven attentional capture. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2, 156–161 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nisbett, R.E., Miyamoto, Y.: The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 467–473 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., Kawamura, T., Larsen, J.T.: Perceiving an object and its context in different cultures: a cultural look at new look. Psychol. Sci. 14, 201–206 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Friesen, C.K., Ristic, J., Kingstone, A.: Attentional effects of counter predictive gaze and arrow cues. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 30, 319–329 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hommel, B., Pratt, J., Colzato, L., Godijn, R.: Symbolic control of visual attention. Psychol. Sci. 12, 360–365 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ristic, J., Friesen, C.K., Kingstone, A.: Are eyes special?: it depends on how you look at it. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 9, 507–513 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tipples, J.: Eye gaze is not unique: automatic orienting in response to uninformative arrows. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 9, 314–318 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyRissho UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations