No evidence that gaze anxiety predicts gaze avoidance behavior during face-to-face social interaction
Abstract: Eye contact is an indispensable social signal, yet for some individuals it is also a source of discomfort they fear and avoid. However, it is still unknown whether gaze anxiety actually produces avoidant gaze behavior in naturalistic, face-to-face interactions. Here, we relied on a novel dual eye-tracking setup that allows us to assess interactive gaze behavior. To investigate the effect of gaze anxiety on gaze behavior, we a priori created groups of participants reporting high or low levels of gaze anxiety. These participants (n = 51) then performed a semi-standardized interaction with a previously unknown individual reporting a medium level of gaze anxiety. The gaze behavior of both groups did not differ in either classical one-way, eye-tracking parameters (e.g. unilateral eye gaze), or interactive, two-way ones (e.g. mutual gaze). Furthermore, the subjective ratings of both participants’ interaction did not differ between groups. Gaze anxious individuals seem to exhibit normal gaze behavior which does not hamper the perceived quality of interactions in a naturalistic face-to-face setup. Our findings point to the existence of cognitive distortions in gaze anxious individuals whose exterior behavior might be less affected than feared by their interior anxiety
- Standort
-
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Frankfurt am Main
- Umfang
-
Online-Ressource
- Sprache
-
Englisch
- Anmerkungen
-
Scientific reports. - 12, 1 (2022) , 21332, ISSN: 2045-2322
- Ereignis
-
Veröffentlichung
- (wo)
-
Freiburg
- (wer)
-
Universität
- (wann)
-
2022
- Urheber
-
Toensing, Daniel Nils
Schiller, Bastian
Vehlen, Antonia
Spenthof, Ines
Domes, Gregor
Heinrichs, Markus
- DOI
-
10.1038/s41598-022-25189-z
- URN
-
urn:nbn:de:bsz:25-freidok-2321834
- Rechteinformation
-
Open Access; Der Zugriff auf das Objekt ist unbeschränkt möglich.
- Letzte Aktualisierung
-
25.03.2025, 13:41 MEZ
Datenpartner
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.
Beteiligte
- Toensing, Daniel Nils
- Schiller, Bastian
- Vehlen, Antonia
- Spenthof, Ines
- Domes, Gregor
- Heinrichs, Markus
- Universität
Entstanden
- 2022
Ähnliche Objekte (12)
Face and Gaze Controlled Onscreen Presentations (FAGCOP)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-face : Perceived personal relevance amplifies face processing
Artificial faces predict gaze allocation in complex dynamic scenes
Documentation of Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 1.0)
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Gender Differences in Face-to-Face Deceptive Behavior
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?
Group mixing drives inequality in face-to-face gatherings
Face and Gaze Controlled Onscreen Presentations (FAGCOP)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-face : Perceived personal relevance amplifies face processing
Artificial faces predict gaze allocation in complex dynamic scenes
Documentation of Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 1.0)
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Gender Differences in Face-to-Face Deceptive Behavior
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?
Group mixing drives inequality in face-to-face gatherings
Face and Gaze Controlled Onscreen Presentations (FAGCOP)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 2.0)
Face-to-face : Perceived personal relevance amplifies face processing
Artificial faces predict gaze allocation in complex dynamic scenes
Documentation of Face-to-Face Surveys (Version 1.0)
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Gender Differences in Face-to-Face Deceptive Behavior
Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?
Befragungsmethoden reviewed: face-to-face, telefonisch oder postalisch?