The role of cognitive load in modulating social looking: a mobile eye tracking study.
Cognitive load
Eye-tracking
Gaze
Pedestrian passing
Social attention
Journal
Cognitive research: principles and implications
ISSN: 2365-7464
Titre abrégé: Cogn Res Princ Implic
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101697632
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 09 2020
16 09 2020
Historique:
received:
20
12
2019
accepted:
29
07
2020
entrez:
16
9
2020
pubmed:
17
9
2020
medline:
18
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The effect of cognitive load on social attention was examined across three experiments in a live pedestrian passing scenario (Experiments 1 and 2) and with the same scenario presented as a video (Experiment 3). In all three experiments, the load was manipulated using an auditory 2-back task. While the participant was wearing a mobile eye-tracker, the participant's fixation behavior toward a confederate was recorded and analyzed based on temporal proximity from the confederate (near or far) and the specific regions of the confederate being observed (i.e., head or body). In Experiment 1 we demonstrated an effect of cognitive load such that there was a lower proportion of fixations and time spent fixating toward the confederate in the load condition. A similar pattern of results was found in Experiment 2 when a within-subject design was used. In Experiment 3, which employed a less authentic social situation (i.e., video), a similar effect of cognitive load was observed. Collectively, these results suggest attentional resources play a central role in social attentional behaviors in both authentic (real-world) and less authentic (video recorded) situations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32936361
doi: 10.1186/s41235-020-00242-5
pii: 10.1186/s41235-020-00242-5
pmc: PMC7493067
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
44Références
Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 May 25;6:143
pubmed: 22654747
Can J Exp Psychol. 2017 Jun;71(2):133-145
pubmed: 28604050
Cognition. 2015 Mar;136:359-64
pubmed: 25540833
Perception. 2006;35(8):1089-105
pubmed: 17076068
Mem Cognit. 1998 Jul;26(4):651-8
pubmed: 9701957
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Apr 5;108(14):5548-53
pubmed: 21436052
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2009 Feb;19(1):52-6
pubmed: 19481441
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2000 Aug;24(6):581-604
pubmed: 10940436
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Sep;133(3):339-54
pubmed: 15355143
Memory. 2010 May;18(4):394-412
pubmed: 20408039
Vision Res. 2000;40(10-12):1489-506
pubmed: 10788654
Front Psychol. 2015 Feb 24;6:65
pubmed: 25759674
Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Aug;24(3):715-8
pubmed: 16099372
Br J Psychiatry. 2000 Apr;176:379-86
pubmed: 10827888
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011 Feb;73(2):291-6
pubmed: 21264723
J Hum Evol. 2007 Mar;52(3):314-20
pubmed: 17140637
Sci Rep. 2013;3:2356
pubmed: 23912766
Dev Psychol. 2002 May;38(3):438-45
pubmed: 12005386
Cogn Psychol. 2000 Aug;41(1):49-100
pubmed: 10945922
Psychol Sci. 2001 Nov;12(6):462-6
pubmed: 11760132
Vision Res. 2011 Sep 1;51(17):1920-31
pubmed: 21784095
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Nov;10(11):1557-67
pubmed: 25925272
Psychon Bull Rev. 1994 Jun;1(2):202-38
pubmed: 24203471
Sci Rep. 2014 Jul 23;4:5794
pubmed: 25052060
J Consult Psychol. 1960 Aug;24:349-54
pubmed: 13813058
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Jul;61(7):986-98
pubmed: 18938281
Cognition. 2017 Nov;168:99-109
pubmed: 28666215
Mem Cognit. 2005 Jun;33(4):727-33
pubmed: 16248336
Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Mar;13(3):127-34
pubmed: 19217822
Br J Psychol. 2015 May;106(2):209-16
pubmed: 25040108
Can J Exp Psychol. 2017 Sep;71(3):212-225
pubmed: 28604029
Psychol Bull. 1986 Jul;100(1):78-100
pubmed: 3526377
Dev Psychol. 2004 Mar;40(2):271-83
pubmed: 14979766
Cogn Psychol. 1980 Jan;12(1):97-136
pubmed: 7351125
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 13;11(12):e0168111
pubmed: 27959925
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Mar;1156:118-40
pubmed: 19338506
Perception. 1999;28(11):1311-28
pubmed: 10755142
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):225-37
pubmed: 19293088
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2012 Oct;38(5):1132-43
pubmed: 22686696