MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148868315 · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00232

Reflexive Joint Attention Depends on Lateralized Cortical Connections

2000· article· en· W2148868315 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador
KeywordsPsychologyGazeReflexivityJoint attentionCognitive psychologyNeuroimagingNeuroscienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joint attention, the tendency to spontaneously direct attention to where someone else is looking, has been thought to occur because eye direction provides a reliable cue to the presence of important events in the environment. We have discovered, however, that adults will shift their attention to where a schematic face is looking--even when gaze direction does not predict any events in the environment. Research with 2 split-brain patients revealed that this reflexive joint attention is lateralized to a single hemisphere. Moreover, although this phenomenon could be inhibited by inversion of a face, eyes alone produced reflexive shifts of attention. Consistent with recent functional neuroimaging studies, these results suggest that lateralized cortical connections between (a) temporal lobe subsystems specialized for processing upright faces and gaze and (b) the parietal area specialized for orienting spatial attention underlie human reflexive shifts of attention in response to gaze direction.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it