Masked face is looking at me: Face mask increases the feeling of being looked at during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

As the COVID-19 global pandemic unfolded, governments recommended wearing face masks as a protective measure. Recent studies have found that a face mask influences perception; but how it affects social perception, especially the judgment of being looked at, is still unknown. This study investigated how wearing a mask influences the judgment of gaze direction by conducting a cone of direct gaze (CoDG) task.

Methods

In Experiment 1, three types of masked faces were considered to investigate whether the effect of masks on CoDG is modulated by mask types. Experiment 2 was to further validate the results of Experiment 1 by adding a learning phase to help participants better distinguish N95 and surgical masks. Furthermore, to investigate whether the effect of masks derives from its social significance, a face with only the eye-region (a mouth-cut face) was used as the stimuli in Experiment 3.

Results

The results of Experiment 1 found that wearing masks widens the CoDG, irrespective of the mask type. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1. Experiment 3 found that the CoDG of N95-masked faces was wider than the mouth-cut and non-masked faces, while no significant difference existed between the CoDG of mouth-cut and non-masked faces, illustrating that the influence of wearing masks on CoDG was due to high-level social significance rather than low-level facial feature information.

Conclusion

The results show that face mask increases the feeling of being looked at during the COVID-19 Pandemic. The present findings are of significance for understanding the impact of wearing masks on human social cognition in the context of COVID-19.

Turning Away From Averted Gazes: The Effect of Social Exclusion on Gaze Cueing

Past studies showed increased sensitivity to other people’s gaze after social exclusion. In the present research, across two studies, we tested whether social exclusion could affect the basic cognitive phenomenon of gaze-cueing effect, namely, the tendency to redirect visual attention to the same location that other people are looking at. To this purpose, participants were socially excluded or included using the Cyberball manipulation. In Study 1, after the manipulation, participants performed a gaze-cueing task in which an individual’s gaze, oriented rightward or leftward, preceded a peripheral target stimulus requiring a simple categorization response. The gaze direction could be congruent or incongruent with the location of the target. Results revealed a reduced gaze-cueing effect for socially excluded than for socially included participants. In Study 2, where human gazes were replaced by arrow cues, such an interaction between social exclusion and trial congruency disappeared, indicating a specific effect of social stimuli. We interpreted these findings with the notion that excluded participants can perceive an averted gaze as a further sign of social exclusion, thus showing a reduced gaze-cueing effect.

The effects of social exclusion on processing of social information - A cognitive psychology perspective

In this article, we review the research investigating the effects of social exclusion on processing of social information. We look into this topic from the point of view of cognitive psychology aiming to provide a systematic description of the effects of exclusion on workings of different cognitive mechanisms involved in social information processing. We focus on four lines of inquiry. First, we present the research on the effects of exclusion on memory for social information. Second, we review studies, which have investigated how exclusion changes the way people view and evaluate their social environment. Third, we look into the research which has investigated whether exclusion modulates early social information processing at the perceptual level. Finally, we discuss the research on the effects of exclusion on attentional processes. Importantly, we also present gaps in our understanding on these issues and provide suggestions as to how future research could provide a more detailed view on how exclusion modulates social information processing.

Social inclusion, but not exclusion, delays attentional disengagement from direct gaze

The present study investigated whether another person’s direct gaze holds a perceiver’s visuospatial attention and whether social exclusion or social inclusion would enhance this effect. Participants were socially excluded, socially included, or underwent a non-social control manipulation in a virtual ball-tossing game. The manipulation was followed by an attentional disengagement task, in which we measured manual response times in identification of peripheral stimuli shown to the left or right of centrally presented faces portraying direct or downward gaze. Contrary to our hypotheses, the response times were not, in general, longer for direct gaze trials than downward gaze trials, and exclusion did not increase the delay in direct gaze trials. Instead, we discovered that, in the social inclusion group, the response times were longer for direct gaze trials relative to downward gaze trials. Thus, social inclusion might have activated affiliation-related cognitive processes leading to delayed attentional disengagement from faces cueing affiliation.

I don't need your attention: ostracism can narrow the cone of gaze

Previous research has shown that ostracized participants seek inclusive cues, such as gaze directed at them, when trying to reaffiliate. However, instead of seeking reinclusion, ostracized individuals may sometimes withdraw from interactions if not offered an opportunity for reaffiliation. In the current study, after an ostracism manipulation with no reaffiliation opportunity, participants judged whether faces portraying direct gaze or slightly averted gaze (2°-8° to the left and to the right) were looking at them or not. Compared to an inclusion group and a non-social control group, ostracized participants accepted a smaller range of gaze directions as being directed at them, i.e., they had a narrower "cone of gaze". The width of the gaze cone was equally wide in the inclusion and control groups. We propose that, without an opportunity for reaffiliation, ostracized participants may start to view other people as particularly unapproachable, possibly indicative of a motivational tendency to disengage from interactions.