LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Ohmann, K; Stahl, J; Mussweiler, T M; Kedia, G (2016)
Publisher: American Psychological Association
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: AEC
A wide array of social decisions relies on social comparisons. As such, these decisions require fast access to relative information. Therefore, we expect that signatures of the comparative process should be observable in electrophysiological components at an early stage of information processing. However, to date, little is known about the neural time course of social target comparisons. Therefore, we tested this hypothesis in two electroencephalography (EEG) studies using a social distance effect paradigm. The distance effect capitalizes on the fact that stimuli close on a certain dimension take longer to compare than stimuli clearly differing on this dimension. Here, we manipulated the distance of face characteristics regarding their levels of attractiveness (Study 1) and trustworthiness (Study 2), two essential social dimensions. In both studies, size comparisons served as a nonsocial control condition. In Study 1, distance related effects were apparent 170 milliseconds (VPP) and 200 milliseconds (N2) after stimulus onset for attractiveness comparisons. In Study 2, trustworthiness comparisons took effect already after 100 milliseconds (N1) and likewise carried over to an event-related N2. Remarkably, we observed a similar temporal pattern for social (attractiveness, trustworthiness) and nonsocial (size) dimensions. These results speak in favor of an early encoding of comparative information and emphasize the primary role of comparison in social information processing.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117- 140. http://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
    • Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 152-170. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x
    • Fox, E., Russo, R., & Georgiou, G. A. (2005). Anxiety modulates the degree of attentive resources required to process emotional faces. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(4), 396-404. http://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.5.4.396
    • Freeman, J. B., Stolier, R. M., Ingbretsen, Z. A., & Hehman, E. A. (2014). Amygdala responsivity to high-level social information from unseen faces. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 34(32), 10573- 10581. http://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5063-13.2014
    • Ganis, G., & Schendan, H. E. (2008). Visual mental imagery and perception produce opposite adaptation effects on early brain potentials. NeuroImage, 42(4), 1714-1727. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.07.004
    • Gehring, W. J., Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Probability effects on stimulus evaluation and response processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 18(1), 198-216.
    • Geiselman, R. E., Haight, N. A., & Kimata, L. G. (1984). Context effects on the perceived physical attractiveness of faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20(5), 409- 424. http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(84)90035-0
    • Giacometti, P., Perdue, K. L., & Diamond, S. G. (2014). Algorithm to find high density EEG scalp coordinates and analysis of their correspondence to structural and functional regions of the brain. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 229, 84-96. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.04.020
    • Gilbert, D. T., Giesler, R. B., & Morris, K. A. (1995). When comparisons arise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 227-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.69.2.227
    • Goldstone, R. L. (1994). The role of similarity in categorization: providing a groundwork. Cognition, 52(2), 125-157. http://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90065-5
    • Goldstone, R. L., & Medin, D. L. (1994). Time course of comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(1), 29-50. http://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.1.29
    • Grandjean, D., & Peters, C. (2011). Novelty Processing and Emotion: Conceptual Developments, Empirical Findings and Virtual Environments. In R. Cowie, C. Pelachaud, & P. Petta (Eds.), Emotion-Oriented Systems (pp. 441-458). Berlin: Springer.
    • Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 55(4), 468-484. http://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(83)90135-9
    • Hahn, U., & Chater, N. (1998). Similarity and rules: distinct? exhaustive? empirically distinguishable? Cognition, 65(2-3), 197-230. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0010- 0277(97)00044-9
    • Hillyard, S. A., Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (1998). Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 353(1373), 1257-1270.
    • Hinojosa, J. A., Mercado, F., & Carretié, L. (2015). N170 sensitivity to facial expression: A meta-analysis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 55, 498-509. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.06.002
    • Hopf, J. M., Luck, S. J., Girelli, M., Hagner, T., Mangun, G. R., Scheich, H., & Heinze, H. J. (2000). Neural sources of focused attention in visual search. Cerebral Cortex, 10(12), 1233-1241.
    • Hsu, Y.-F., & Szűcs, D. (2012). The time course of symbolic number adaptation: Oscillatory EEG activity and event-related potential analysis. NeuroImage, 59(4), 3103-3109. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.11.017
    • Itier, R. J., & Taylor, M. J. (2002). Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: A repetition study using ERPs. Neuroimage, 15. http://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0982
    • Itier, R. J., & Taylor, M. J. (2004). N170 or N1? Spatiotemporal Differences between Object and Face Processing Using ERPs. Cerebral Cortex, 14(2), 132-142. http://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhg111
    • Itier, R., & Parkington, K. (2015). From eye to face: support for neural inhibition in holistic processing. Journal of Vision, 15(12), 679. http://doi.org/10.1167/15.12.679
    • Ito, T. A., & Urland, G. R. (2003). Race and gender on the brain: electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 616-626. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.85.4.616
    • Ito, T. A., & Urland, G. R. (2005). The influence of processing objectives on the perception of faces: an ERP study of race and gender perception. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(1), 21-36. http://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.5.1.21
    • Jacques, C., & Rossion, B. (2006). The speed of individual face categorization. Psychological Science, 17(6), 485-492. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01733.x
    • Jemel, B., Schuller, A.-M., Cheref-Khan, Y., Goffaux, V., Crommelinck, M., & Bruyer, R. (2003). Stepwise emergence of the face-sensitive N170 event-related potential component. Neuroreport, 14(16), 2035-2039. http://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnr.0000092465.31470.2f
    • Joyce, C., & Rossion, B. (2005). The face-sensitive N170 and VPP components manifest the same brain processes: The effect of reference electrode site. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116(11), 2613-2631. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2005.07.005
    • Jung, K., Ruthruff, E., Tybur, J. M., Gaspelin, N., & Miller, G. (2012). Perception of facial attractiveness requires some attentional resources: implications for the “automaticity” of psychological adaptations. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(3), 241-250. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.001
    • Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93(2), 136-153. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.136
    • Kamarajan, C., Pandey, A. K., Chorlian, D. B., & Porjesz, B. (2015). The use of current source density as electrophysiological correlates in neuropsychiatric disorders: A review of human studies. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 97(3), 310-322. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.10.013
    • Kampe, K. K. W., Frith, C. D., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, U. (2001). Psychology: Reward value of attractiveness and gaze. Nature, 413(6856), 589-589. http://doi.org/10.1038/35098149
    • Katznelson, R. (1981). EEG recording, electrode placement, and aspects of generator localization. In Electric fields of the brain. Oxford: Nunez, PL.
    • Kayser, J., & Tenke, C. E. (2006). Principal components analysis of Laplacian waveforms as a generic method for identifying ERP generator patterns: I. Evaluation with auditory oddball tasks. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 117(2), 348-368. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2005.08.034
    • Kayser, J., Tenke, C. E., Gates, N. A., Kroppmann, C. J., Gil, R. B., & Bruder, G. E. (2006). ERP/CSD indices of impaired verbal working memory subprocesses in schizophrenia. Psychophysiology, 43(3), 237-252. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00398.x
    • Kedia, G., Mussweiler, T., Mullins, P., & Linden, D. E. J. (2014). The neural correlates of beauty comparison. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(5), 681-688. http://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nst026
    • Kenrick, D. T., & Gutierres, S. E. (1980). Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 131-140. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.131
    • Kenrick, D. T., & Keefe, R. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15(1), 75-91. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00067595
    • Kernis, M. H., & Wheeler, L. (1981). Beautiful friends and ugly strangers: radiation and contrast effects in perceptions of same-sex pairs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7(4), 617-620. http://doi.org/10.1177/014616728174017
    • Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390-423.
    • Levine, G. M., Halberstadt, J. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (1996). Reasoning and the weighting of attributes in attitude judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 230-240. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.230
    • Li, W., Zinbarg, R. E., Boehm, S. G., & Paller, K. A. (2007). Neural and behavioral evidence for affective priming from unconsciously perceived emotional facial expressions and the influence of trait anxiety. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(1), 95-107. http://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20006
    • Lindner, M., Hundhammer, T., Ciaramidaro, A., Linden, D. E. J., & Mussweiler, T. (2008). The neural substrates of person comparison-An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 40(2), 963- 971. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.12.022
    • Loring-Meier, S., & Halpern, D. F. (1999). Sex differences in visuospatial working memory: components of cognitive processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(3), 464-471. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210836
    • Luck, S. J. (2005). An Introduction to the Event-related Potential Technique. MIT Press.
    • Luck, S. J., Heinze, H. J., Mangun, G. R., & Hillyard, S. A. (1990). Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. II. Functional dissociation of P1 and N1 components. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 75(6), 528-542. http://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(90)90138-A
    • Manis, M., Biernat, M., & Nelson, T. F. (1991). Comparison and expectancy processes in human judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 203-211.
    • Mark, L. S. (1998). The exploration of complexity and the complexity of exploration. Hoffman, R. R., Sherrick, M. F. & Warm, J. S. (Eds.), Viewing psychology as a whole: The integrative science of William N. Dember (pp. 191-204). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Marzi, T., Righi, S., Ottonello, S., Cincotta, M., & Viggiano, M. P. (2014). Trust at first sight: evidence from ERPs. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(1), 63-72. http://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss102
    • Marzi, T., & Viggiano, M. P. (2010). When memory meets beauty: Insights from eventrelated potentials. Biological Psychology, 84(2), 192-205. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.01.013
    • Mayer, J., & Mussweiler, T. (2011). Suspicious spirits, flexible minds: When distrust enhances creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1262-1277. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0024407
    • Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Markman, A. B. (1995). Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processes and decision processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2(1), 1-19. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214410
    • Medin, D., & Schaffer, M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85(3), 207-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.207
    • Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inenequality. Nature, 215(5109), 1519-1520. http://doi.org/10.1038/2151519a0
    • Mussweiler, T. (2003). Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences. Psychological Review, 472-489.
    • Mussweiler, T., & Damisch, L. (2008). Going back to Donald: how comparisons shape judgmental priming effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1295- 1315. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0013261
    • Mussweiler, T., & Epstude, K. (2009). Relatively fast! Efficiency advantages of comparative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(1), 1-21. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0014374
    • Mussweiler, T., & Rüter, K. (2003). What friends are for! The use of routine standards in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 467-481. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.467
    • New, J., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2007). Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(42), 16598-16603. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703913104
    • Newman, L. S., & Uleman, J. S. (1990). Assimilation and contrast effects in spontaneous trait inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(2), 224-240. http://doi.org/10.1177/0146167290162004
    • Ochsner, K. N. (2004). Current directions in social cognitive neuroscience. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14(2), 254-258. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2004.03.011
    • Olson, I. R., & Marshuetz, C. (2005). Facial attractiveness is appraised in a glance. Emotion, 5(4), 498-502. http://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.5.4.498
    • Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(32), 11087-11092. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805664105
    • Perrin, F., Pernier, J., Bertrand, O., & Echallier, J. F. (1989). Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 72(2), 184-187. http://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(89)90180-6
    • Pinel, P., Dehaene, S., Rivière, D., & LeBihan, D. (2001). Modulation of parietal activation by semantic distance in a number comparison task. NeuroImage, 14(5), 1013-1026. http://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0913
    • Pizzagalli, D. A., Lehmann, D., Hendrick, A. M., Regard, M., Pascual-Marqui, R. D., & Davidson, R. J. (2002). Affective judgments of faces modulate early activity (∼160 ms) within the fusiform gyri. NeuroImage, 16(3, Part A), 663-677. http://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2002.1126
    • Pomplun, M., Sichelschmidt, L., Wagner, K., Clermont, T., Rickheit, G., & Ritter, H. (2001). Comparative visual search: a difference that makes a difference. Cognitive Science, 25(1), 3-36. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2501_2
    • Posner, M. I. (2005). Timing the brain: Mental chronometry as a tool in neuroscience. PLoS Biology, 3(2). http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030051
    • Posten, A.-C., & Mussweiler, T. (2013). When distrust frees your mind: The stereotypereducing effects of distrust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 567- 584. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0033170
    • Qiu, J., Yu, C., Li, H., Jou, J., Tu, S., Wang, T., … Zhang, Q. (2010). The impact of social comparison on the neural substrates of reward processing: An event-related potential study. NeuroImage, 49(1), 956-962. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.08.025
    • Reis, H. T., Wheeler, L., Spiegel, N., Kernis, M. H., Nezlek, J., & Perri, M. (1982). Physical attractiveness in social interaction: II. Why does appearance affect social experience? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 979-996. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.979
    • Reynvoet, B., & Brysbaert, M. (1999). Single-digit and two-digit Arabic numerals address the same semantic number line. Cognition, 72(2), 191-201. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0010- 0277(99)00048-7
    • Righart, R., & de Gelder, B. (2007). Impaired face and body perception in developmental prosopagnosia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(43), 17234-17238. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707753104
    • Ro, T., Russell, C., & Lavie, N. (2001). Changing faces: A detection advantage in the flicker paradigm. Psychological Science, 12(1), 94-99. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00317
    • Rodway, P., Schepman, A., & Lambert, J. (2013). The influence of position and context on facial attractiveness. Acta Psychologica, 144(3), 522-529. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.09.004
    • Rossion, B. (2014). Understanding face perception by means of human electrophysiology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(6), 310-318. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.013
    • Rossion, B., & Caharel, S. (2011). ERP evidence for the speed of face categorization in the human brain: Disentangling the contribution of low-level visual cues from face perception. Vision Research, 51(12), 1297-1311. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2011.04.003
    • Ruys, K. I., Spears, R., Gordijn, E. H., & de Vries, N. K. (2006). Two faces of (dis)similarity in affective judgments of persons: Contrast or assimilation effects revealed by morphs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 399-411. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.399
    • Schacht, A., Werheid, K., & Sommer, W. (2008). The appraisal of facial beauty is rapid but not mandatory. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(2), 132. http://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.2.132
    • Schomaker, J., & Meeter, M. (2014). Novelty detection is enhanced when attention is otherwise engaged: an event-related potential study. Experimental Brain Research, 232(3), 995-1011. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3811-y
    • Schwarz, W., & Heinze, H. (1998). On the interaction of numerical and size information in digit comparison: a behavioral and event-related potential study. Neuropsychologia, 36(11), 1167-1179. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00001-3
    • Shepperd, J. A., & Taylor, K. M. (1999). Ascribing advantages to social comparison targets. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(2), 103-117. http://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BA210203
    • Sloutsky, V. M. (2003). The role of similarity in the development of categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(6), 246-251. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00109-8
    • Snodgrass, J. G. (1972). Matching patterns vs matching digits: The effect of memory dependence and complexity on “same”-“different” reaction times. Perception & Psychophysics, 11(5), 341-349. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206264
    • Sutherland, C. A. M., Rowley, L. E., Amoaku, U. T., Daguzan, E., Kidd-Rossiter, K. A., Maceviciute, U., & Young, A. W. (2015). Personality judgments from everyday images of faces. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1616. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01616
    • Szũcs, D., & Csépe, V. (2005). The effect of numerical distance and stimulus probability on ERP components elicited by numerical incongruencies in mental addition. Brain Research. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 289-300. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.04.010
    • Szũcs, D., Soltész, F., Jármi, E., & Csépe, V. (2007). The speed of magnitude processing and executive functions in controlled and automatic number comparison in children: an electro-encephalography study. Behavioral and Brain Functions: BBF, 3, 23. http://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-3-23
    • Tanaka, J., Luu, P., Weisbrod, M., & Kiefer, M. (1999). Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 10(4), 829-835.
    • Tarbi, E. C., Sun, X., Holcomb, P. J., & Daffner, K. R. (2011). Surprise? Early visual novelty processing is not modulated by attention. Psychophysiology, 48(5), 624-632. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01129.x
    • Temple, E., & Posner, M. I. (1998). Brain mechanisms of quantity are similar in 5-year-old children and adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95(13), 7836-7841.
    • Tenke, C. E., & Kayser, J. (2005). Reference-free quantification of EEG spectra: combining current source density (CSD) and frequency principal components analysis (fPCA). Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 116(12), 2826-2846. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2005.08.007
    • Tenke, C. E., & Kayser, J. (2012). Generator localization by current source density (CSD): Implications of volume conduction and field closure at intracranial and scalp resolutions. Clinical Neurophysiology, 123(12), 2328-2345. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2012.06.005
    • Todorov, A., Loehr, V., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2010). The obligatory nature of holistic processing of faces in social judgments. Perception, 39(4), 514-532. http://doi.org/10.1068/p6501
    • Todorov, A., Olivola, C. Y., Dotsch, R., & Mende-Siedlecki, P. (2015). Social attributions from faces: determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 519-545. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011- 143831
    • Todorov, A., Said, C. P., Engell, A. D., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2008). Understanding evaluation of faces on social dimensions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(12), 455-460. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.001
    • Trope, Y. (1986). Identification and inferential processes in dispositional attribution. Psychological Review, 93(3), 239-257. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.239
    • Trujillo, L. T., Jankowitsch, J. M., & Langlois, J. H. (2014). Beauty is in the ease of the beholding: a neurophysiological test of the averageness theory of facial attractiveness. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(3), 1061-1076. http://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-013-0230-2
    • Tuch, A. N., Bargas-Avila, J. A., Opwis, K., & Wilhelm, F. H. (2009). Visual complexity of websites: Effects on users' experience, physiology, performance, and memory. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(9), 703-715. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.04.002
    • Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4), 327-352. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327
    • van Hooff, J. C., Crawford, H., & van Vugt, M. (2011). The wandering mind of men: ERP evidence for gender differences in attention bias towards attractive opposite sex faces. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6(4), 477-485. http://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq066
    • van 't Wout, M., & Sanfey, A. G. (2008). Friend or foe: The effect of implicit trustworthiness judgments in social decision-making. Cognition, 108(3), 796-803. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.002
    • Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (2000). The visual N1 component as an index of a discrimination process. Psychophysiology, 37(2), 190-203.
    • Watanabe, S., Miki, K., & Kakigi, R. (2005). Mechanisms of face perception in humans: a magneto- and electro-encephalographic study. Neuropathology: Official Journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology, 25(1), 8-20.
    • Wedell, D. H., Parducci, A., & Geiselman, R. E. (1987). A formal analysis of ratings of physical attractiveness: Successive contrast and simultaneous assimilation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23(3), 230-249. http://doi.org/10.1016/0022- 1031(87)90034-5
    • Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592-598. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9280.2006.01750.x
    • Willis, M. L., Lawson, D. L., Ridley, N. J., Koval, P., & Rendell, P. G. (2015). The contribution of emotional empathy to approachability judgments assigned to emotional faces is context specific. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1209. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01209
    • Wong, T. K. W., Fung, P. C. W., McAlonan, G. M., & Chua, S. E. (2009). Spatiotemporal dipole source localization of face processing ERPs in adolescents: a preliminary study. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 5(1), 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-5-16
    • Woodman, G. F. (2010). A brief introduction to the use of event-related potentials (ERPs) in studies of perception and attention. Attention, perception & psychophysics, 72(8). http://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.8.2031
    • Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (1999). Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search. Nature, 400(6747), 867-869. http://doi.org/10.1038/23698
    • Wu, J., Duan, H., Tian, X., Wang, P., & Zhang, K. (2012). The effects of visual imagery on face identification: an ERP study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 305. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00305
    • Wu, Y., Zhang, D., Elieson, B., & Zhou, X. (2012). Brain potentials in outcome evaluation: when social comparison takes effect. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 85(2), 145-152. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.06.004
    • Wykowska, A., Wiese, E., Prosser, A., & Müller, H. J. (2014). Beliefs about the minds of others influence how we process sensory information. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e94339. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094339
    • Zhang, D., Liu, Y., Wang, X., Chen, Y., & Luo, Y. (2014). The duration of disgusted and fearful faces is judged longer and shorter than that of neutral faces: the attention-related time distortions as revealed by behavioral and electrophysiological measurements. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 293. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00293
    • Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Li, S., & Wang, L. (2003). Event-related potential N270, a negative component to identification of conflicting information following memory retrieval. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 114(12), 2461-2468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00251- 7
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article