MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224256627 · doi:10.1037/emo0001040

Spatial frequencies affect cuteness perception of infant faces.

2022· article· en· W4224256627 on OpenAlexaff
Mengni Zhou, Huazhi Li, Qingqing Li, Tsubasa Uehara, Lichang Yao, Jiajia Yang, Yoshimichi Ejima, Satoshi Takahashi, Jinglong Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueEmotion · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceOkayama University
KeywordsPerceptionAffect (linguistics)Computer sciencePsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cuteness perception is a basic function in social interactions. Most studies focus on the impact of facial elemental features on cuteness ratings, but there are many factors that affect cuteness perception. Spatial frequency (SF) is one of the most important parameters in studies on faces. However, few studies have investigated the impact of SFs on cuteness perception. In this study, 16 images of infant faces with four cuteness levels were selected by a prerating experiment. Using a 7-point Likert scale paradigm, participants were asked to rate the cuteness of infant faces, including one version of broad unfiltered faces and four versions of filtered faces. The results showed that filtered SFs reduced cuteness ratings and that the impact of SFs was related to the cuteness levels of faces. Specifically, faces with low SFs got the lowest cuteness ratings. The ratings of faces with low SFs in neutral cuteness had a greater reduction than that in positive cuteness. In comparison, faces with medium and high SFs obtained relatively high cuteness ratings. However, the ratings in medium SFs were higher than that in high SFs if the cuteness of faces exceeded a certain level. Interestingly, their ratings reduction size increased with the improvement of cuteness levels. These results extend our understanding of the cuteness mechanism from an SF processing perspective. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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 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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmotionSame topicEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFrench-language works237,207