↓ Skip to main content

Stimulus-category competition, inhibition, and affective devaluation: a novel account of the uncanny valley

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Stimulus-category competition, inhibition, and affective devaluation: a novel account of the uncanny valley
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00249
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne E. Ferrey, Tyler J. Burleigh, Mark J. Fenske

Abstract

Stimuli that resemble humans, but are not perfectly human-like, are disliked compared to distinctly human and non-human stimuli. Accounts of this "Uncanny Valley" effect often focus on how changes in human resemblance can evoke different emotional responses. We present an alternate account based on the novel hypothesis that the Uncanny Valley is not directly related to 'human-likeness' per se, but instead reflects a more general form of stimulus devaluation that occurs when inhibition is triggered to resolve conflict between competing stimulus-related representations. We consider existing support for this inhibitory-devaluation hypothesis and further assess its feasibility through tests of two corresponding predictions that arise from the link between conflict-resolving inhibition and aversive response: (1) that the pronounced disliking of Uncanny-type stimuli will occur for any image that strongly activates multiple competing stimulus representations, even in the absence of any human-likeness, and (2) that the negative peak of an 'Uncanny Valley' should occur at the point of greatest stimulus-related conflict and not (in the presence of human-likeness) always closer to the 'human' end of a perceptual continuum. We measured affective responses to a set of line drawings representing non-human animal-animal morphs, in which each continuum midpoint was a bistable image (Experiment 1), as well as to sets of human-robot and human-animal computer-generated morphs (Experiment 2). Affective trends depicting classic Uncanny Valley functions occurred for all continua, including the non-human stimuli. Images at continua midpoints elicited significantly more negative affect than images at endpoints, even when the continua included a human endpoint. This illustrates the feasibility of the inhibitory-devaluation hypothesis and the need for further research into the possibility that the strong dislike of Uncanny-type stimuli reflects the negative affective consequences of cognitive inhibition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 87 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 35%
Computer Science 6 7%
Arts and Humanities 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 27 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 25 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,469,131
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,066
of 34,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,293
of 278,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#70
of 454 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 278,736 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 454 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.