Social gaze cueing elicits facilitatory and inhibitory effects on movement execution when the model might act on an object.

Autor:	Wang XM; Faculty of Kinesiology & Physical Education, Centre for Motor Control, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada., Karlinsky A; Department of Kinesiology, California State University, San Bernardino, San Bernardino, CA, USA., Constable MD; Department of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK., Gregory SE; Department of Psychology, University of Salford, Salford, UK., Welsh TN; Faculty of Kinesiology & Physical Education, Centre for Motor Control, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) [Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)] 2024 Feb; Vol. 77 (2), pp. 230-241. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Mar 31.
DOI:	10.1177/17470218231162546
Abstrakt:	Social cues, such as eye gaze and pointing fingers, can increase the prioritisation of specific locations for cognitive processing. A previous study using a manual reaching task showed that, although both gaze and pointing cues altered target prioritisation (reaction times [RTs]), only pointing cues affected action execution (trajectory deviations). These differential effects of gaze and pointing cues on action execution could be because the gaze cue was conveyed through a disembodied head; hence, the model lacked the potential for a body part (i.e., hands) to interact with the target. In the present study, the image of a male gaze model, whose gaze direction coincided with two potential target locations, was centrally presented. The model either had his arms and hands extended underneath the potential target locations, indicating the potential to act on the targets (Experiment 1), or had his arms crossed in front of his chest, indicating the absence of potential to act (Experiment 2). Participants reached to a target that followed a nonpredictive gaze cue at one of three stimulus onset asynchronies. RTs and reach trajectories of the movements to cued and uncued targets were analysed. RTs showed a facilitation effect for both experiments, whereas trajectory analysis revealed facilitatory and inhibitory effects, but only in Experiment 1 when the model could potentially act on the targets. The results of this study suggested that when the gaze model had the potential to interact with the cued target location, the model's gaze affected not only target prioritisation but also movement execution. Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu