Preferred distance from camera for online interactions and its relation with individual differences in pathogen sensitivity

Humans maintain distance from others in their interpersonal interactions and this has been documented in previous research in real-world scenarios. However, thanks to telecommunication technologies, humans are also interacting online with each other. While individuals are competent in adjusting their interpersonal distance based on their own preferences and others' considerations in a real-world situation, they might not be as competent in their online interactions. The aim of the current study is twofold: a) to investigate individuals’ preferred distance from a camera both for themselves and others while in an online interaction, and b) to test whether individual differences in pathogen sensitivity influence their preferred distances in an online interaction. Participants (N = 159) were asked to indicate their comfort distance from a camera for themselves and others while interacting in an online scenario. The distance from the camera varied systematically from 50 cm to 200 cm. Results showed that participants preferred to stand 80 cm–120 cm from a camera. As for the avatars that the participants viewed online, men and women preferred female avatars to stand between 80 cm to 130 cm from a camera, and male avatars to stand between 80 cm to 150 cm from a camera. And although the chances of contracting a disease online is zero, we found that germ aversion and concern about contracting COVID-19 were associated with the preferred distances from the camera. We attribute this result to a false positive error in social cognition.

Unattractive faces are more attractive when the bottom-half is masked, an effect that reverses when the top-half is concealed

Facial attractiveness in humans signals an individual’s genetic condition, underlying physiology and health status, serving as a cue to one’s mate value. The practice of wearing face masks for prevention of transmission of airborne infections may disrupt one’s ability to evaluate facial attractiveness, and with it, cues to an individual's health and genetic condition. The current research investigated the effect of face masks on the perception of face attractiveness. Across four studies, we tested if below- and above-average attractive full faces are equally affected by wearing facial masks. The results reveal that for young faces (Study 1) and old faces (Study 2) a facial mask increases the perceived attractiveness of relatively unattractive faces, but there is no effect of wearing a face mask for highly attractive faces. Study 3 shows that the same pattern of ratings emerged when the bottom-half of the faces are cropped rather than masked, indicating that the effect is not mask-specific. Our final Study 4, in which information from only the lower half of the faces was made available, showed that contrary to our previous findings, highly attractive half-faces are perceived to be less attractive than their full-face counterpart;but there is no such effect for the less attractive faces. This demonstrates the importance of the eye-region in the perception of attractiveness, especially for highly attractive faces. Collectively these findings suggest that a positivity-bias enhances the perception of unattractive faces when only the upper face is visible, a finding that may not extend to attractive faces because of the perceptual weight placed on their eye-region. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41235-022-00359-9.

Facial masks affect emotion recognition in the general population and individuals with autistic traits.

Facial expressions, and the ability to recognize these expressions, have evolved in humans to communicate information to one another. Face masks are equipment used in healthcare by health professionals to prevent the transmission of airborne infections. As part of the social distancing efforts related to COVID-19, wearing facial masks has been practiced globally. Such practice might influence affective information communication among humans. Previous research suggests that masks disrupt expression recognition of some emotions (e.g., fear, sadness or neutrality) and lower the confidence in their identification. To extend the previous research, in the current study we tested a larger and more diverse sample of individuals and also investigated the effect of masks on perceived intensity of expressions. Moreover, for the first time in the literature we examined these questions using individuals with autistic traits. Specifically, across three experiments using different populations (college students and general population), and the 10-item Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ-10; lower and higher scorers), we tested the effect of facial masks on facial emotion recognition of anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, and neutrality. Results showed that the ability to identify all facial expressions decreased when faces were masked, a finding observed across all three studies, contradicting previous research on fear, sad, and neutral expressions. Participants were also less confident in their judgements for all emotions, supporting previous research; and participants perceived emotions as less expressive in the mask condition compared to the unmasked condition, a finding novel to the literature. An additional novel finding was that participants with higher scores on the AQ-10 were less accurate and less confident overall in facial expression recognition, as well as perceiving expressions as less intense. Our findings reveal that wearing face masks decreases facial expression recognition, confidence in expression identification, as well as the perception of intensity for all expressions, affecting high-scoring AQ-10 individuals more than low-scoring individuals.

Associations of political orientation, xenophobia, right-wing authoritarianism, and concern of COVID-19: Cognitive responses to an actual pathogen threat.

Previous research has related the existence of pathogenic threat to an individual's social cognition, with people avoiding physical interactions with those who have potential contagion risks. These pathogenic induced behavioral responses have broader social consequences, such as avoidance of outgroup members or negative reactions to individuals foreign to one's own group. Specially, higher pathogen threat is associated with xenophobic attitudes and ideological tendencies, such as authoritarianism and political conservatism. The COVID-19 pandemic provides an unprecedented opportunity to investigate the effect of pathogenic threat on the above-mentioned variables in a real-world situation. Collecting data during a low (N = 598) and heightened (N = 309) perceived threat of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US, our results reveal that Right-Wing Authoritarian traits, but not xenophobia, increase with a rise in the number of national pathogenic cases. Moreover, our results replicate previous findings regarding the associations between pathogen threat, political orientation, xenophobia, and Right-Wing Authoritarianism, in an actual pathogen threat scenario.

Concern About Contracting COVID-19 Predicts Men's Preference for Female Facial Femininity, But Not Women's Preference for Male Facial Masculinity.

OBJECTIVES: Humans have evolved a behavioral system that responds to perceptual cues suggesting the existence of a pathogenic threat in other individuals and the environment. While previous investigations have reported that individuals' sexual preferences are influenced by a pathogen threat, the empirical support for face preference is mixed (i.e., the association of pathogenic threat and individuals' preferences for masculine and/or feminine faces is equivocal). The COVID-19 pandemic provides the opportunity to investigate the association of pathogenic threat and men's and women's preferences for sexual dimorphism of faces in the opposite sex in a real-world pathogenic situation. METHODS: Data were collected during COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) from men and women in the United States, and women in Iran, on preferences for masculinity in men's faces using women participants, and femininity in women's faces using men. RESULTS: Results showed that concern about an actual pathogenic threat (i.e., contracting COVID-19) predicts men's preference for female facial femininity, but not women's preference for male facial masculinity (for both U.S. and Iranian women). CONCLUSION: By using an actual pathogenic threat, our results support previous findings that men's preferences for female faces are shifted to less feminine faces under pathogenic threat. Moreover, our results provide support for the distinction between the behavioral immune system and pathogen disgust, at least for men's preference for feminine female faces. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40750-020-00158-w.