The Uncanny Valley and the Importance of Eye Contact

Abstract The Uncanny Valley hypothesis describes the negative emotional response of human observers that is evoked by artificial figures or prostheses with a human-like appearance. Many studies have pointed out the meaning of facial features, but did not further investigate the importance of eye contact and its role in decision making about artificial faces. In this study we recorded the number and duration of fixations of participants (N = 53) and recorded gaze movements and fixations on different areas of interest, as well as the response time when a participant judged a face as non-human. In a subsequent questionnaire, we grasped subjective ratings. In our analysis we found correlations between the likeability and the duration of eye fixations on the eye area. The gaze sequences show that artificial faces were visually processed similar to the real ones and mostly remained not assessed as artificial as long as the eye regions were not considered.

[1]  G. Rhodes,et al.  A comparative view of face perception. , 2010, Journal of comparative psychology.

[2]  L. Parr,et al.  The evolution of face processing in primates , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Human emotion and the uncanny valley: A GLM, MDS, and Isomap analysis of robot video ratings , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[4]  Federico Alvarez,et al.  User Centric Media , 2010, Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering.

[5]  T. Wheatley,et al.  The Tipping Point of Animacy , 2010, Psychological science.

[6]  N. Emery,et al.  The eyes have it: the neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze , 2000, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[7]  Jun'ichiro Seyama,et al.  The Uncanny Valley: Effect of Realism on the Impression of Artificial Human Faces , 2007, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[8]  J. Haxby,et al.  Human neural systems for face recognition and social communication , 2002, Biological Psychiatry.

[9]  Soraia Raupp Musse,et al.  Evaluation of the Uncanny Valley in CG Characters , 2012, IVA.

[10]  Mark Grimshaw,et al.  Uncanny behaviour in survival horror games , 2010 .

[11]  L F Dell'Osso,et al.  Eyes as the Center of Focus in the Visual Examination of Human Faces , 1978, Perceptual and motor skills.

[12]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  Mark Grimshaw,et al.  Facial expression of emotion and perception of the Uncanny Valley in virtual characters , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  Nishan Canagarajah,et al.  Eye Movements to Natural Images as a Function of Sex and Personality , 2012, PloS one.

[15]  M. Farah.  Is face recognition ‘special’? Evidence from neuropsychology , 1996, Behavioural Brain Research.

[16]  Marcus Cheetham,et al.  Category Processing and the human likeness dimension of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis: Eye-Tracking Data , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[17]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Mortality salience and the uncanny valley , 2005, 5th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, 2005..

[18]  Yuki Yamada,et al.  Categorization difficulty is associated with negative evaluation in the “uncanny valley” phenomenon , 2013 .

[19]  B. Rossion,et al.  Fixation Patterns During Recognition of Personally Familiar and Unfamiliar Faces , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[20]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Sensitivity to the proportions of faces that vary in human likeness , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[21]  M. Farah,et al.  What is "special" about face perception? , 1998, Psychological review.

[22]  M A Just,et al.  A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. , 1980, Psychological review.

[23]  Asif A Ghazanfar,et al.  Monkey visual behavior falls into the uncanny valley , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Arthur M. Jacobs,et al.  OGAMA (Open Gaze and Mouse Analyzer): Open-source software designed to analyze eye and mouse movements in slideshow study designs , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[25]  David Hanson.  Exploring the Aesthetic Range for Humanoid Robots , 2006 .

[26]  J. Vauclair,et al.  Picture recognition in animals and humans , 2000, Behavioural Brain Research.

[27]  C. Villate,et al.  Eyes always attract attention but gaze orienting is task-dependent: Evidence from eye movement monitoring , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[28]  Laura Chamberlain.  Eye Tracking Methodology; Theory and Practice , 2007 .

[29]  V. Bruce,et al.  Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[30]  Catrin Misselhorn,et al.  Empathy with Inanimate Objects and the Uncanny Valley , 2009, Minds and Machines.

[31]  Heloir,et al.  The Uncanny Valley , 2019, The Animation Studies Reader.

[32]  M. Farah,et al.  The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms , 1995, Vision Research.

[33]  V. Bruce,et al.  Remembering facial configurations , 1991, Cognition.

[34]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  My robotic doppelgänger - a critical look at the Uncanny Valley , 2009, RO-MAN 2009 - The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[35]  K. MacDorman,et al.  Subjective Ratings of Robot Video Clips for Human Likeness, Familiarity, and Eeriness: An Exploration of the Uncanny Valley , 2006 .

[36]  Tony Ro,et al.  Attentional biases for faces and body parts , 2007 .

[37]  L. Jäncke,et al.  Human Neuroscience , 2022 .

[38]  Frédéric Gosselin,et al.  Spatio-temporal dynamics of face recognition in a flash: it's in the eyes , 2004, Cogn. Sci..