Indicate that the inter-individual variance was much higher in SA. This

Indicate that the inter-individual variance was much higher in SA. This between-subject variance is also depicted in the box plot in Figure 3A. Importantly, the establishment of mutual gaze was a prerequisite for the initiation of the interaction to ensure that scan paths always began with a fixation of the virtual character. The increased DCC 2618 site number of gaze shifts also resulted in significantly longer trial durations in shared (M = 3886.39 ms, SD = 1838.91 ms) vs. JA (M = 2040.11 ms, SD = 974.64 ms), t (28.89) = -3.97, p < 0.001, r = -0.58. Interestingly, in JA participants showed significantly more gaze shifts in self-initiated trials (M = 1.41, SD = 0.68) compared to otherinitiated trials (M = 1.07, SD = PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19910816 0.10), t (19.79) = 2.18, p = 0.042, r = 0.33, while there was no such effect of initiation in SA, t (38) = 0.24, p = 0.81 (see Figure 3B), indicating that only the gaze dynamics of JA were influenced by the initiation of the interaction.An independent samples t-test indicated that significantly more gaze shifts were required to reach a situation of shared (M = 2.55, SD = 1.26) as compared to JA (M = 1.23,DISCUSSION The present study introduced a novel interactive eye-tracking paradigm suitable to study multiple facets of triadic interactions between two agents and real-world objects in real-time. On a methodological level, this provides an important complement to previous work by our group which has not involved real objects but rather concentrated on the dyadic aspects of gaze-following and JA (Schilbach et al., 2010; Wilms et al., 2010; Pfeiffer et al., 2011). This methodological advancement was used for the empirical investigation of temporal and dynamic aspects of social gaze as a socially salient form of embodied actions with great ecological validity. In Experiments 1a and 1b, participant’s sense of agency was measured as a function of both the congruency and latency of another person’s gaze reaction. In Experiment 2, differences in gaze dynamics and trial duration resulting in JA and SA were examined. These results provide interesting insights into gaze behavior and the experience of gaze reactions in an ecologicallyFIGURE 3 | (A) A box plot illustrates the inter-individual variance of the number of gaze shifts before indicating the experience of joint as compared to shared attention. (B) Whether participants initiated the gaze-based interaction only affected the number of gaze shifts required to report a state of joint, but not shared attention.Frontiers in Psychology | Cognitive ScienceDecember 2012 | Volume 3 | Article 537 |Pfeiffer et al.Dynamics of social gazevalid but experimentally controllable setting. Conceptual as well as methodological implications are discussed in the following.EFFECTS OF THE CONGRUENCY OF GAZE REACTIONSExperiments 1a and 1b investigated how related participants experienced different latencies of gaze reactions to their own gaze behavior by varying these latencies and the congruency of reactions (i.e., gaze-following vs. gaze MEK162 aversion) systematically. In the following, we suggest that the experience of relatedness can be taken as a measure of the sense of agency (Pacherie, 2012). It was first predicted that the congruency of the other’s gaze reaction (gaze-following vs. gaze aversion) strongly influences participants’ sense of agency, as measured by their experience of relatedness. Indeed, results indicated that gaze-following is experienced more strongly related to one’s own gaze shifts as compared t.Indicate that the inter-individual variance was much higher in SA. This between-subject variance is also depicted in the box plot in Figure 3A. Importantly, the establishment of mutual gaze was a prerequisite for the initiation of the interaction to ensure that scan paths always began with a fixation of the virtual character. The increased number of gaze shifts also resulted in significantly longer trial durations in shared (M = 3886.39 ms, SD = 1838.91 ms) vs. JA (M = 2040.11 ms, SD = 974.64 ms), t (28.89) = -3.97, p < 0.001, r = -0.58. Interestingly, in JA participants showed significantly more gaze shifts in self-initiated trials (M = 1.41, SD = 0.68) compared to otherinitiated trials (M = 1.07, SD = PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19910816 0.10), t (19.79) = 2.18, p = 0.042, r = 0.33, while there was no such effect of initiation in SA, t (38) = 0.24, p = 0.81 (see Figure 3B), indicating that only the gaze dynamics of JA were influenced by the initiation of the interaction.An independent samples t-test indicated that significantly more gaze shifts were required to reach a situation of shared (M = 2.55, SD = 1.26) as compared to JA (M = 1.23,DISCUSSION The present study introduced a novel interactive eye-tracking paradigm suitable to study multiple facets of triadic interactions between two agents and real-world objects in real-time. On a methodological level, this provides an important complement to previous work by our group which has not involved real objects but rather concentrated on the dyadic aspects of gaze-following and JA (Schilbach et al., 2010; Wilms et al., 2010; Pfeiffer et al., 2011). This methodological advancement was used for the empirical investigation of temporal and dynamic aspects of social gaze as a socially salient form of embodied actions with great ecological validity. In Experiments 1a and 1b, participant’s sense of agency was measured as a function of both the congruency and latency of another person’s gaze reaction. In Experiment 2, differences in gaze dynamics and trial duration resulting in JA and SA were examined. These results provide interesting insights into gaze behavior and the experience of gaze reactions in an ecologicallyFIGURE 3 | (A) A box plot illustrates the inter-individual variance of the number of gaze shifts before indicating the experience of joint as compared to shared attention. (B) Whether participants initiated the gaze-based interaction only affected the number of gaze shifts required to report a state of joint, but not shared attention.Frontiers in Psychology | Cognitive ScienceDecember 2012 | Volume 3 | Article 537 |Pfeiffer et al.Dynamics of social gazevalid but experimentally controllable setting. Conceptual as well as methodological implications are discussed in the following.EFFECTS OF THE CONGRUENCY OF GAZE REACTIONSExperiments 1a and 1b investigated how related participants experienced different latencies of gaze reactions to their own gaze behavior by varying these latencies and the congruency of reactions (i.e., gaze-following vs. gaze aversion) systematically. In the following, we suggest that the experience of relatedness can be taken as a measure of the sense of agency (Pacherie, 2012). It was first predicted that the congruency of the other’s gaze reaction (gaze-following vs. gaze aversion) strongly influences participants’ sense of agency, as measured by their experience of relatedness. Indeed, results indicated that gaze-following is experienced more strongly related to one’s own gaze shifts as compared t.