↓ Skip to main content

Arousal, valence, and the uncanny valley: psychophysiological and self-report findings

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Arousal, valence, and the uncanny valley: psychophysiological and self-report findings
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00981
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus Cheetham, Lingdan Wu, Paul Pauli, Lutz Jancke

Abstract

The main prediction of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis (UVH) is that observation of humanlike characters that are difficult to distinguish from the human counterpart will evoke a state of negative affect. Well-established electrophysiological [late positive potential (LPP) and facial electromyography (EMG)] and self-report [Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM)] indices of valence and arousal, i.e., the primary orthogonal dimensions of affective experience, were used to test this prediction by examining affective experience in response to categorically ambiguous compared with unambiguous avatar and human faces (N = 30). LPP and EMG provided direct psychophysiological indices of affective state during passive observation and the SAM provided self-reported indices of affective state during explicit cognitive evaluation of static facial stimuli. The faces were drawn from well-controlled morph continua representing the UVH' dimension of human likeness (DHL). The results provide no support for the notion that category ambiguity along the DHL is specifically associated with enhanced experience of negative affect. On the contrary, the LPP and SAM-based measures of arousal and valence indicated a general increase in negative affective state (i.e., enhanced arousal and negative valence) with greater morph distance from the human end of the DHL. A second sample (N = 30) produced the same finding, using an ad hoc self-rating scale of feelings of familiarity, i.e., an oft-used measure of affective experience along the UVH' familiarity dimension. In conclusion, this multi-method approach using well-validated psychophysiological and self-rating indices of arousal and valence rejects - for passive observation and for explicit affective evaluation of static faces - the main prediction of the UVH.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
Unknown 83 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 23 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 35%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Engineering 6 7%
Computer Science 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 24 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,913,566
of 24,223,370 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#17,257
of 32,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,169
of 266,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#384
of 559 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,223,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 266,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 559 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.