↓ Skip to main content

Through your eyes: incongruence of gaze and action increases spontaneous perspective taking

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
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
Through your eyes: incongruence of gaze and action increases spontaneous perspective taking
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00455
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tiziano Furlanetto, Andrea Cavallo, Valeria Manera, Barbara Tversky, Cristina Becchio

Abstract

What makes people spontaneously adopt the perspective of others? Previous work suggested that perspective taking can serve understanding the actions of others. Two studies corroborate and extend that interpretation. The first study varied cues to intentionality of eye gaze and action, and found that the more the actor was perceived as potentially interacting with the objects, the stronger the tendency to take his perspective. The second study investigated how manipulations of gaze affect the tendency to adopt the perspective of another reaching for an object. Eliminating gaze cues by blurring the actor's face did not reduce perspective-taking, suggesting that in the absence of gaze information, observers rely entirely on the action. Intriguingly, perspective-taking was higher when gaze and action did not signal the same intention, suggesting that in presence of ambiguous behavioral intention, people are more likely take the other's perspective to try to understand the action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
France 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Israel 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 85 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 28%
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 56 61%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Engineering 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 11 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 September 2014.
All research outputs
#2,828,959
of 23,792,386 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,394
of 7,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,032
of 285,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#233
of 861 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,792,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 285,708 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 861 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.