MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283821055 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/qu96d

Mindreading in the Pandemic: Face Masks Negatively Skew Theory of Mind Judgements

2022· preprint· en· W4283821055 on OpenAlexaff
Héctor Leos, Ian Gold, Fernanda Pérez-Gay Juárez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValence (chemistry)PsychologyFacial expressionEmotional valenceArousalCognitive psychologyTheory of mindFace (sociological concept)Face perceptionSet (abstract data type)Social psychologyCognitionPerceptionNeuroscienceCommunicationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Face masks obscure a significant portion of the face, reducing the amount of information available to gauge the mental states of others—that is, to exercise the Theory of Mind (ToM) capacity. In two experiments, we assessed the effect of face masks on ToM judgements, measuring recognition accuracy, perceived valence, and perceived arousal of a set facial expressions corresponding to 45 different mental states. Significant effects of face masks were found in all three variables, with differential effects found for positive and negative mental states: Judgements of positive expressions are less accurate when masked, and the expressions are perceived to be less positive and less intense; judgements of negative expressions are also less accurate but, in contrast, the expressions are perceived to be more intense. In addition, we identified face muscles associated with changes in perceived valence and arousal, shedding light on the mechanisms through which face masks impact ToM judgements, which might be relevant for mitigation strategies. We discuss the implications of these findings for real-world social interactions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.270
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.083 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment→French-language works237,207→