ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Variations in the Appearance and Interpretation of Interpersonal Eye Contact in Social Categorizations and Psychiatric Populations Worldwide: A Scoping Review with a Critical Appraisal of the Literature.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Autistic eye contact? A hermeneutic phenomenological multicenter study of the similarities and differences in eye-contact experiences between adults with and without autism.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEye contact is one of the most fundamental forms of interhuman communication. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive research comparing how eye contact is made and interpreted in all possible populations worldwide. This study presents a summary of the existing literature on these modalities stratified to social categorizations and psychiatric disorders.
methodA scoping review with critical appraisal of the literature according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Databases AnthroSource, Medline, CINAHL, the Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO) and PsychInfo were searched.
results7068 articles were screened for both the grey literature and reference lists, of which 385 were included, 282 for social categorizations and 103 for psychiatric disorders. In total, 603 thematic clustered outcomes of variations were included. Methodological quality was generally moderate to good.
conclusionsThere is a great degree of variation in the presentation and interpretation of eye contact between and within populations. It remains unclear why specific variations occur in populations. Additionally, no gold standard for how eye contact should be used or interpreted emerged from the studies. Further research into the reason for differences in eye contact between and within populations is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.