Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Stereotype Content Model02:16

Stereotype Content Model

14.7K
The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) was first proposed by Susan Fiske and her colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002; see also Fiske, 2012 and Fiske, 2017). The SCM specifies that when someone encounters a new group, they will stereotype them based on two metrics: warmth—or that group’s perceived intent, and how likely they are to provide help or inflict harm—and competence—or their ability to carry out that objective. Depending on the warmth-competence...
14.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Intersectional dehumanization in faces: Facial attractiveness and perceived intelligence differentially predict dehumanization across intersecting race and gender identities.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Humans do not "play fair" with social robots: Unequal task sharing in an attentional task.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same author

Systematic review and meta-analysis of toluene concentration: a comparative assessment of indoor air quality in residential buildings.

BMC public health·2026
Same author

Measuring trust in artificial intelligence with the N2pc component.

NeuroImage·2026
Same author

Robots in the moral loop: a field study of AI advisors in ethical military decision-making.

Frontiers in artificial intelligence·2025
Same author

Suppressing versus expressing anger influences person perceptions of warmth and competence.

Emotion (Washington, D.C.)·2025
Same journal

Error-related potentials detection to enhance human-robot collaboration: a mini review.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
Same journal

Distinct oculomotor signatures for task disengagement and reduction in vigilance during a supervisory task.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
Same journal

Reframing neuroergonomics in an evolutionary and active inference context.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
Same journal

Physiological sensing for situational awareness: a theory-driven integrative review of multimodal and unsupervised approaches for visual search and human-autonomy teaming.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
Same journal

EEG hyperscanning in intellectual disability: a scoping review with implications for cognitive stimulation therapy.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
Same journal

Editorial: Virtual and robotic embodiment.

Frontiers in neuroergonomics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 5, 2025

SSVEP-based Experimental Procedure for Brain-Robot Interaction with Humanoid Robots
11:01

SSVEP-based Experimental Procedure for Brain-Robot Interaction with Humanoid Robots

Published on: November 24, 2015

13.2K

Robots engage face-processing less strongly than humans.

Ali Momen1,2, Kurt Hugenberg3, Eva Wiese2,4

  • 1Warfighter Effectiveness Research Center, United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, CO, United States.

Frontiers in Neuroergonomics
|January 18, 2024
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Robot faces are processed less like human faces, showing a reduced inversion effect. This suggests robot face design needs careful consideration for effective human-robot interactions.

Keywords:
anthropomorphismface-processinghuman–agent interactionhuman–robot interactionsocial cognition

More Related Videos

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.4K
A Real-Time Interactive System for Studying Confrontational Pursuit Behavior in Rodents
06:25

A Real-Time Interactive System for Studying Confrontational Pursuit Behavior in Rodents

Published on: May 16, 2025

158

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 5, 2025

SSVEP-based Experimental Procedure for Brain-Robot Interaction with Humanoid Robots
11:01

SSVEP-based Experimental Procedure for Brain-Robot Interaction with Humanoid Robots

Published on: November 24, 2015

13.2K
Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.4K
A Real-Time Interactive System for Studying Confrontational Pursuit Behavior in Rodents
06:25

A Real-Time Interactive System for Studying Confrontational Pursuit Behavior in Rodents

Published on: May 16, 2025

158

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)
  • Robotics

Background:

  • Human faces engage specialized social brain areas like the Fusiform Face Area (FFA) and Superior Temporal Sulcus (STS).
  • Differences in robot facial features and spatial arrangements may lead to less social processing compared to human faces.
  • This could result in outgroup homogeneity, miscalibrated trust, and errors in task allocation in human-robot interactions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate whether robot faces are processed in a less social manner than human faces.
  • To examine differences in face processing using the face inversion paradigm as a proxy for neural activation.

Main Methods:

  • The study employed the face inversion paradigm, comparing recognition performance for upright versus inverted human and robot faces.
  • The inversion effect (reduced recognition for inverted faces) was measured for both stimulus types.

Main Results:

  • A reduced face inversion effect was observed for robot faces compared to human faces.
  • This finding supports the hypothesis that robot faces are processed in a less face-like manner by the human brain.

Conclusions:

  • Robot faces appear to be processed differently, engaging social brain mechanisms to a lesser extent than human faces.
  • Roboticists should prioritize robot face design that effectively engages typical face-processing mechanisms to improve human-robot interactions.