Searching the expressive face: Evidence for both the right hemisphere and valence-specific hypotheses.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quick and accurate judgments of emotional expressivity and attractiveness facilitate social interactions. Eye tracking was used to examine left/right asymmetries across 2 studies. Fixations to each hemiface, and to the eyes and mouth, when judging attractiveness and emotional expressivity were examined. Overall, more fixations occurred on the left hemiface (from the viewer's point of view), even when mirror-reversed, supporting the suggestion that we intuitively know the left hemiface is more expressive. The right side of the mouth was fixated more when judging happiness, whereas the left eye was fixated more for sadness and the left mouth when rating emotional expressivity. The present findings support the notion that the right hemisphere and valence-specific hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. The right hemisphere hypothesis is supported when assessing global facial qualities (i.e., hemiface); however, hemispheric processing differences emerge when exploring the eyes and mouth. The current findings highlight the importance of not only considering how the face is examined more generally, but of also exploring smaller regions of interest to investigate lateral biases. Future research should therefore include analyses of fixations to the hemifaces, as well as to these smaller regions of interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".