Cargando…

“Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not

The present investigation tests: (i) whether the perception of an human infant’s eyes, relative to other facial features, especially strongly elicits “parental” responses (e.g., appraisals of cuteness and vulnerability); (ii) if, so, whether effects of the visual perception of eyes may be partially...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Woo, Brandon M., Schaller, Mark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7202593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32374738
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232059
_version_ 1783529728900071424
author Woo, Brandon M.
Schaller, Mark
author_facet Woo, Brandon M.
Schaller, Mark
author_sort Woo, Brandon M.
collection PubMed
description The present investigation tests: (i) whether the perception of an human infant’s eyes, relative to other facial features, especially strongly elicits “parental” responses (e.g., appraisals of cuteness and vulnerability); (ii) if, so, whether effects of the visual perception of eyes may be partially attributable to eye contact; (iii) whether the perception of non-human animals’ (puppy dogs’) eyes also especially strongly influence appraisals of their cuteness and vulnerability; and (iv) whether individual differences in caregiving motives moderate effects. Results from 5 experiments (total N = 1458 parents and non-parents) provided empirical evidence to evaluate these hypotheses: Appraisals of human infants were influenced especially strongly by the visual perception of human infants’ eyes (compared to other facial features); these effects do not appear to be attributable to eye contact; the visual perception of eyes influenced appraisals of puppy dogs, but not exactly in the same way that it influenced appraisals of human infants; and there was no consistent evidence of moderation by individual differences in caregiving motives. These results make novel contributions to several psychological literatures, including literatures on the motivational psychology of parental care and on person perception.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7202593
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72025932020-05-12 “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not Woo, Brandon M. Schaller, Mark PLoS One Research Article The present investigation tests: (i) whether the perception of an human infant’s eyes, relative to other facial features, especially strongly elicits “parental” responses (e.g., appraisals of cuteness and vulnerability); (ii) if, so, whether effects of the visual perception of eyes may be partially attributable to eye contact; (iii) whether the perception of non-human animals’ (puppy dogs’) eyes also especially strongly influence appraisals of their cuteness and vulnerability; and (iv) whether individual differences in caregiving motives moderate effects. Results from 5 experiments (total N = 1458 parents and non-parents) provided empirical evidence to evaluate these hypotheses: Appraisals of human infants were influenced especially strongly by the visual perception of human infants’ eyes (compared to other facial features); these effects do not appear to be attributable to eye contact; the visual perception of eyes influenced appraisals of puppy dogs, but not exactly in the same way that it influenced appraisals of human infants; and there was no consistent evidence of moderation by individual differences in caregiving motives. These results make novel contributions to several psychological literatures, including literatures on the motivational psychology of parental care and on person perception. Public Library of Science 2020-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7202593/ /pubmed/32374738 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232059 Text en © 2020 Woo, Schaller http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Woo, Brandon M.
Schaller, Mark
“Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title_full “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title_fullStr “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title_full_unstemmed “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title_short “Parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): Evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
title_sort “parental” responses to human infants (and puppy dogs): evidence that the perception of eyes is especially influential, but eye contact is not
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7202593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32374738
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232059
work_keys_str_mv AT woobrandonm parentalresponsestohumaninfantsandpuppydogsevidencethattheperceptionofeyesisespeciallyinfluentialbuteyecontactisnot
AT schallermark parentalresponsestohumaninfantsandpuppydogsevidencethattheperceptionofeyesisespeciallyinfluentialbuteyecontactisnot