Feature and motion-based gaze cuing is linked with reduced social competence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gaze following is a fundamental ability that plays an important role in human social function. However, the link between these two processes remains elusive. On the one hand, typically developing persons show robust gaze following in laboratory cuing tasks. On the other hand, investigations with individuals with autism suggest that reduced social competence in this population may partly reflect an atypical access to social information through attending to perceptual changes that normally accompany gaze shifts, like luminance or motion transients. Here we investigated if gaze cuing in typically developing individuals was modulated by similar task-irrelevant perceptual changes. In Experiment 1, a social gaze cue was presented with or without a luminance change. In Experiment 2, a social gaze cue was presented together with a motion cue. Both experiments indicated reduced magnitudes of gaze cuing in persons with low social competence on trials containing an irrelevant perceptual change. This suggests that similarly to individuals with autism, typically developing persons with low social competence also utilize idiosyncratic perceptual changes in the environment to access social content, revealing strong links between basic gaze following abilities and a range of social competence within typical individuals.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".