Limits...
Dual-route model of the effect of head orientation on perceived gaze direction.

Otsuka Y, Mareschal I, Calder AJ, Clifford CW - J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform (2014)

Bottom Line: We found that the perceived direction of gaze was generally biased in the opposite direction to head orientation (a repulsive effect).Based on these findings, we developed a dual-route model, which proposes that the 2 opposing effects of head orientation occur through 2 distinct routes.In the framework of this dual-route model, we explain and reconcile the findings from previous studies, and provide a functional account of attractive and repulsive effects and their interaction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, The University of Sydney.

ABSTRACT
Previous studies on gaze perception have identified 2 opposing effects of head orientation on perceived gaze direction-1 repulsive and the other attractive. However, the relationship between these 2 effects has remained unclear. By using a gaze categorization task, the current study examined the effect of head orientation on the perceived direction of gaze in a whole-head condition and an eye-region condition. We found that the perceived direction of gaze was generally biased in the opposite direction to head orientation (a repulsive effect). Importantly, the magnitude of the repulsive effect was more pronounced in the eye-region condition than in the whole-head condition. Based on these findings, we developed a dual-route model, which proposes that the 2 opposing effects of head orientation occur through 2 distinct routes. In the framework of this dual-route model, we explain and reconcile the findings from previous studies, and provide a functional account of attractive and repulsive effects and their interaction.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

The psychophysical model of Mareschal et al. (2013b) and fit of the model to the categorization data averaged across subjects. (A) The psychophysical model showing an observer’s sensory representation of the gaze stimulus. The likelihood of the observer responding “direct” to the direction of gaze, indicated by the star, corresponds to the area of the gray region under the Gaussian. The likelihood of the observer responding “left” corresponds to the area of the white region, and the likelihood of responding “right” is effectively zero. The vertical dashed lines represent the categorical boundaries. The distance between the two represents the width of the cone of direct gaze. The middle point of the categorical boundaries is taken as the peak direction of perceptually direct gaze. The standard deviation of the likelihood function, σrep, represents the level of sensory noise affecting the observer’s judgments (B to F). Model fit to the averaged data across subjects from the whole-head condition (solid lines) and from the eye-region condition (dashed lines) for each head orientation. The orientation of the head is represented by the number to the side of each panel. L = “left” response; D = “direct” response; R = “right” response.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120707&req=5

fig7: The psychophysical model of Mareschal et al. (2013b) and fit of the model to the categorization data averaged across subjects. (A) The psychophysical model showing an observer’s sensory representation of the gaze stimulus. The likelihood of the observer responding “direct” to the direction of gaze, indicated by the star, corresponds to the area of the gray region under the Gaussian. The likelihood of the observer responding “left” corresponds to the area of the white region, and the likelihood of responding “right” is effectively zero. The vertical dashed lines represent the categorical boundaries. The distance between the two represents the width of the cone of direct gaze. The middle point of the categorical boundaries is taken as the peak direction of perceptually direct gaze. The standard deviation of the likelihood function, σrep, represents the level of sensory noise affecting the observer’s judgments (B to F). Model fit to the averaged data across subjects from the whole-head condition (solid lines) and from the eye-region condition (dashed lines) for each head orientation. The orientation of the head is represented by the number to the side of each panel. L = “left” response; D = “direct” response; R = “right” response.

Mentions: To quantify the difference in gaze perception between the whole-head and eye-region conditions, we fitted the psychophysical model developed by Mareschal et al. (2013b) to the individual data. Figure 7A schematically represents the psychophysical model of Mareschal et al., and Figure 7B through 7F show the model fits to the data averaged across subjects for each head orientation in the whole-head and the eye-region conditions. Inspection of the bell-shaped curves representing “direct” response in each graph shows the peak response tends to shift toward the head orientation, and this trend is clearer for the eye-region (dashed line) condition than for the whole-head condition (solid line). In addition, the curve for the eye-region (dashed line) condition is wider than for the whole-head condition (solid line) at 0° head orientation, corresponding to more direct responses in the eye-region condition.


Dual-route model of the effect of head orientation on perceived gaze direction.

Otsuka Y, Mareschal I, Calder AJ, Clifford CW - J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform (2014)

The psychophysical model of Mareschal et al. (2013b) and fit of the model to the categorization data averaged across subjects. (A) The psychophysical model showing an observer’s sensory representation of the gaze stimulus. The likelihood of the observer responding “direct” to the direction of gaze, indicated by the star, corresponds to the area of the gray region under the Gaussian. The likelihood of the observer responding “left” corresponds to the area of the white region, and the likelihood of responding “right” is effectively zero. The vertical dashed lines represent the categorical boundaries. The distance between the two represents the width of the cone of direct gaze. The middle point of the categorical boundaries is taken as the peak direction of perceptually direct gaze. The standard deviation of the likelihood function, σrep, represents the level of sensory noise affecting the observer’s judgments (B to F). Model fit to the averaged data across subjects from the whole-head condition (solid lines) and from the eye-region condition (dashed lines) for each head orientation. The orientation of the head is represented by the number to the side of each panel. L = “left” response; D = “direct” response; R = “right” response.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120707&req=5

fig7: The psychophysical model of Mareschal et al. (2013b) and fit of the model to the categorization data averaged across subjects. (A) The psychophysical model showing an observer’s sensory representation of the gaze stimulus. The likelihood of the observer responding “direct” to the direction of gaze, indicated by the star, corresponds to the area of the gray region under the Gaussian. The likelihood of the observer responding “left” corresponds to the area of the white region, and the likelihood of responding “right” is effectively zero. The vertical dashed lines represent the categorical boundaries. The distance between the two represents the width of the cone of direct gaze. The middle point of the categorical boundaries is taken as the peak direction of perceptually direct gaze. The standard deviation of the likelihood function, σrep, represents the level of sensory noise affecting the observer’s judgments (B to F). Model fit to the averaged data across subjects from the whole-head condition (solid lines) and from the eye-region condition (dashed lines) for each head orientation. The orientation of the head is represented by the number to the side of each panel. L = “left” response; D = “direct” response; R = “right” response.
Mentions: To quantify the difference in gaze perception between the whole-head and eye-region conditions, we fitted the psychophysical model developed by Mareschal et al. (2013b) to the individual data. Figure 7A schematically represents the psychophysical model of Mareschal et al., and Figure 7B through 7F show the model fits to the data averaged across subjects for each head orientation in the whole-head and the eye-region conditions. Inspection of the bell-shaped curves representing “direct” response in each graph shows the peak response tends to shift toward the head orientation, and this trend is clearer for the eye-region (dashed line) condition than for the whole-head condition (solid line). In addition, the curve for the eye-region (dashed line) condition is wider than for the whole-head condition (solid line) at 0° head orientation, corresponding to more direct responses in the eye-region condition.

Bottom Line: We found that the perceived direction of gaze was generally biased in the opposite direction to head orientation (a repulsive effect).Based on these findings, we developed a dual-route model, which proposes that the 2 opposing effects of head orientation occur through 2 distinct routes.In the framework of this dual-route model, we explain and reconcile the findings from previous studies, and provide a functional account of attractive and repulsive effects and their interaction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, The University of Sydney.

ABSTRACT
Previous studies on gaze perception have identified 2 opposing effects of head orientation on perceived gaze direction-1 repulsive and the other attractive. However, the relationship between these 2 effects has remained unclear. By using a gaze categorization task, the current study examined the effect of head orientation on the perceived direction of gaze in a whole-head condition and an eye-region condition. We found that the perceived direction of gaze was generally biased in the opposite direction to head orientation (a repulsive effect). Importantly, the magnitude of the repulsive effect was more pronounced in the eye-region condition than in the whole-head condition. Based on these findings, we developed a dual-route model, which proposes that the 2 opposing effects of head orientation occur through 2 distinct routes. In the framework of this dual-route model, we explain and reconcile the findings from previous studies, and provide a functional account of attractive and repulsive effects and their interaction.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus