↓ Skip to main content

Perspective Distortion from Interpersonal Distance Is an Implicit Visual Cue for Social Judgments of Faces

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
24 X users
patent
67 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perspective Distortion from Interpersonal Distance Is an Implicit Visual Cue for Social Judgments of Faces
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0045301
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ronnie Bryan, Pietro Perona, Ralph Adolphs

Abstract

The basis on which people make social judgments from the image of a face remains an important open problem in fields ranging from psychology to neuroscience and economics. Multiple cues from facial appearance influence the judgments that viewers make. Here we investigate the contribution of a novel cue: the change in appearance due to the perspective distortion that results from viewing distance. We found that photographs of faces taken from within personal space elicit lower investments in an economic trust game, and lower ratings of social traits (such as trustworthiness, competence, and attractiveness), compared to photographs taken from a greater distance. The effect was replicated across multiple studies that controlled for facial image size, facial expression and lighting, and was not explained by face width-to-height ratio, explicit knowledge of the camera distance, or whether the faces are perceived as typical. These results demonstrate a novel facial cue influencing a range of social judgments as a function of interpersonal distance, an effect that may be processed implicitly.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Turkey 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Hungary 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Czechia 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 91 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 22%
Student > Master 14 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 10 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 50%
Computer Science 10 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 14 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 236. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2024.
All research outputs
#155,901
of 25,014,758 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#2,348
of 216,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#687
of 178,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#23
of 4,265 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,014,758 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 178,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,265 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.