Research in cognitive science typically places a boundary between participants and the stimuli they are asked to process. While this separation affords experimental control, it can also severely limit the generalizability of the conclusions that are drawn. Here, we review new evidence that some conclusions that have been drawn about social attention do not extend beyond the laboratory. They fundamentally misrepresent how social attention operates in natural social contexts. Critically, these difficulties have led to renewed interest in the dual function of gaze—when in authentic social situations, the eyes both collect information from the environment (an encoding function) and communicate one’s mental states to others (a signaling function)—which traditional social-attention paradigms arguably have failed to capture. We review this recent work and discuss the utility of adopting more naturalistic methods in cognitive science.
ArgyleM.CookM. (1976). (See References). A classic, early work on gaze that emphasized its dual function
2.
KingstoneA.SmilekD.EastwoodJ. D. (2008). (See References). A representative review of arguments for the utility of adopting more ecological methods in cognitive science in general; included in the same issue are responses to the article and the author’s response to those responses.
3.
PönkänenL. M.AlhoniemiA.LeppänenJ. M.HietanenJ. K. (2011). Does it make a difference if I have eye contact with you or with your picture? An ERP study. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6, 486–494. Empirical work providing evidence that how we respond to direct verses averted gaze is also modulated by whether the gazer is a real person or picture of a person.
4.
RichardsonD. C.GobelM. S. (2015). (See References). A comprehensive, highly accessible overview of research on social attention.
5.
SchilbachL.TimmermansB.ReddyV.CostattA.BenteG.SchlichtT.VogeleyK. (2013). (See References). A recent and comprehensive argument for the use of paradigms that more closely approximate authentic social interactions in research on social cognition.
6.
ArgyleM.CookM. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Baron-CohenS.WheelwrightS.JolliffeA. T. (1997). Is there a “language of the eyes”? Evidence from normal adults, and adults with autism or Asperger syndrome. Visual Cognition, 4, 311–331.
8.
BatkiA.Baron-CohenS.WheelwrightS.ConnellanJ.AhluwaliaJ. (2000). Is there an innate gaze module? Evidence from human neonates. Infant Behavior & Development, 23, 223–229.
9.
BirminghamE.KingstoneA. (2009). Human social attention: A new look at past, present and future investigations. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 118–140.
10.
ChenX.ZelinskyG. J. (2006). Real-world visual search is dominated by top-down guidance. Vision Research, 46, 4118–4133.
11.
De WaalF. B. M. (1989). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
12.
DicksM.ButtonC.DavidsK. (2010). Examination of gaze behaviors under in situ and video simulation task constraints reveals differences in information pickup for perception and action. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 706–720.
13.
EmeryN. J. (2000). The eyes have it: The neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 24, 581–604.
14.
Fletcher-WatsonS.FindlayJ. M.LeekamS. R.BensonV. (2008). Rapid detection of person information in a naturalistic scene. Perception, 37, 571–583.
15.
FriesenC. K.KingstoneA. (1998). The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 490–495.
16.
FrischenA.BaylissA. P.TipperS. P. (2007). Gaze cueing of attention: Visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 694–724.
17.
GallupA. C.ChongA.CouzinI. D. (2012). The directional flow of visual information transfer between pedestrians. Biology Letters, 8, 520–522.
18.
GallupA. C.HaleJ. J.SumpterD. J. T.GarnierS.KacelnikA.KrebsJ. R.CouzinI. D. (2012). Visual attention and the acquisition of information in human crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 109, 7245–7250.
19.
GobelM. S.KimH. S.RichardsonD. C. (2015). The dual function of social gaze. Cognition, 136, 359–364.
20.
GoffmanE. (1963). Behavior in public places.New York, NY: Free Press.
21.
JarickM.KingstoneA. (2015). The duality of gaze: Eyes extract and signal social information during sustained cooperative and competitive dyadic gaze. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1423. Retrieved from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01423/full
22.
KingstoneA. (2009). Taking a real look at social attention. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 19, 52–56.
23.
KingstoneA.SmilekD.EastwoodJ. D. (2008). Cognitive ethology: A new approach for studying human cognition. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 317–340.
24.
KuhnG.TeszkaR.TenawN.KingstoneA. (2016). Don’t be fooled! Top-down inhibition of attentional orienting in response to social cues in face-to-face and video context. Cognition, 146, 136–142.
25.
LaidlawK. E. W.FoulshamT.KuhnG.KingstoneA. (2011). Potential social interactions are important to social attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 108, 5548–5553.
26.
LaidlawK. E. W.RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (2012). A new look at social attention: Orienting to the eyes is not (entirely) under volitional control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1132–1143.
27.
LaidlawK. E. W.RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (in press). Levels of complexity and the duality of gaze: How social attention changes from lab to life. In ObhiS. D.CrossE. S. (Eds.), Shared representations: Sensorimotor Foundations of Social Life. Cambridge University Press.
28.
LangtonS. R.WattR. J.BruceV. (2000). Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 50–59.
NasiopoulosE.RiskoE. F.FoulshamT.KingstoneA. (2014). Wearable computing: Will it make people prosocial?British Journal of Psychology, 106, 209–216.
31.
NasiopoulosE.RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (2015). Social attention, social presence, and the dual function of gaze. In PuceA.BertenthalB. I. (Eds.), The many faces of social attention: Behavioral and neural measures (pp. 129–155). New York, NY: Springer.
32.
NavalpakkamV.IttiL. (2005). Modeling the influence of task on attention. Vision Research, 45, 205–231.
33.
PfeifferU. J.VogeleyK.SchilbachL. (2013). From gaze cueing to dual eye-tracking: Novel approaches to investigate the neural correlates of gaze in social interaction. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37, 2516–2528.
34.
RichardsonD. C.GobelM. S. (2015). Social attention. In FawcettJ.RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (Eds.), The handbook of attention (pp. 349–367). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (2011). Eyes wide shut: Implied social presence, eye tracking and attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 291–296.
36.
RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (2015). Attention in the wild: Visual attention in complex, dynamic and social environments. In HoffmanR. R.HancockP. A.ScerboM. W.ParasuramanR.SzalmaJ. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of applied perception research (pp. 466–487). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
37.
RiskoE. F.LaidlawK.FreethM.FoulshamT.KingstoneA. (2012). Social attention with real versus reel stimuli: Toward an empirical approach to concerns about ecological validity. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, Article 143. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00143
38.
SchilbachL. (2015). Eye to eye, face to face and brain to brain: Novel approaches to study the behavioral dynamics and neural mechanisms of social interactions. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 130–135.
TatlerB. W.HayhoeM. M.LandM. F.BallardD. H. (2011). Eye guidance in natural vision: Reinterpreting salience. Journal of Vision, 11(5), Article 5. doi:10.1167/11.5.5
41.
TuranoK. A.GeruschatD. R.BakerF. H. (2003). Oculomotor strategies for the direction of gaze tested with a real-world activity. Vision Research, 43, 333–346.
42.
WolfeJ. M. (2007). Guided search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In GrayW. D. (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 99–119). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
WuD. W.-L.BischofW. F.KingstoneA. (2013). Looking while eating: The importance of social context to social attention. Scientific Reports, 3, Article 2356.
44.
WuD. W.-L.BischofW. F.KingstoneA. (2014). Natural gaze signaling in a social context. Evolution & Human Behavior, 35, 211–218.
45.
YarbusA. L. (1967). Eye movements and vision. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
46.
ZuckermanM.MiserandinoM.BernieriF. (1983). Civil inattention exists—in elevators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 578–586.
