Перегляд вихідного коду сторінки Comprehensive Comments On LY2157299 In Step-By-Step Order

The degree to which this methodological concern impacts the current  findings and those in the gaze estimation literature more generally has to be resolved in future studies. To our knowledge, there is one study, however, that sheds some light on this issue. Hudson et al. (2009) examined how perceived gaze direction impacts the judgment of how far a an agent��s head had rotated. In this study, a non-face control stimulus was also used. The results indicated that, whereas an effect of perceived gaze direction was found for the face stimuli, none was observed for the non-face control stimuli, implying that the observed effect was specific to gaze stimuli. Due to the static nature of our stimuli, the overshoot effect reported in this study is necessarily [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/ly2157299.html LY2157299 price] limited to implied attentional shifts. The question remains whether the use of dynamic stimuli (e.g., containing motion-based attentional shifts) would affect the integration of eye/head and body information such that qualitatively different results  would be observed. For example, dynamic stimuli might convey more information regarding the nature and type of attentional shift of the looker which could attenuate the overshoot effect as observed in this study for static stimuli. Indeed, Bock et al. (2008) report that observers are quite accurate in a triadic gaze task when they are allowed to follow the gaze of a live model. The results of these experiments fit best with the model (Hietanen, 1999, 2002) proposed for how the different directional cues of eye, head, and body orientation are integrated. From a looker-related (allocentric) frame of reference, eye orientation would be processed relative to head orientation and head orientation relative to body orientation to determine whether the looker has an averted attention. This model suggests that the different cues are always integrated with each  other in order to determine the looker��s attention. It is possible, however, that the extent to which these cues are integrated depends on the context. For example, if both eye and head information already indicate that the looker has averted his attention one can ask whether head orientation will still be referenced to body orientation. However, in the absence of eye information or when eye and head orientation are congruent, it would be informative to reference head to body orientation. The viability of this model could be addressed by conducting an experiment in which eye, head, and body orientation are manipulated independently. Seyama and Nagayama (2005) conducted such a study and their findings indicate that congruent eye�Chead relationships and incongruent eye�Ctorso relationships both trigger attentional shifts. They never consider the head�Ctorso relationship, however. A future study could manipulate eye, head, and body orientation independently to study whether there still is an influence of body orientation when eye and head orientation are not congruent.