PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article 460 Copyright © 2002 American Psychological Society VOL. 13, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2002 ARE YOU LOOKING AT ME? Eye Gaze and Person Perception C. Neil Macrae, 1 Bruce M. Hood, 2 Alan B. Milne, 3 Angela C. Rowe, 2 and Malia F. Mason 1 1 Dartmouth College; 2 University of Bristol, Bristol, England; and 3 University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland Abstract—Previous research has highlighted the pivotal role played by gaze detection and interpretation in the development of social cog- nition. Extending work of this kind, the present research investigated the effects of eye gaze on basic aspects of the person-perception pro- cess, namely, person construal and the extraction of category-related knowledge from semantic memory. It was anticipated that gaze direc- tion would moderate the efficiency of the mental operations through which these social-cognitive products are generated. Specifically, eye gaze was expected to influence both the speed with which targets could be categorized as men and women and the rate at which associ- ated stereotypic material could be accessed from semantic memory. The results of two experiments supported these predictions: Targets with nondeviated (i.e., direct) eye gaze elicited facilitated categorical responses. The implications of these findings for recent treatments of person perception are considered. Humans and many other species tend to look at things in their environment that are of immediate interest to them. You might be the recipient of another’s gaze, for instance, because you are a potential meal, a mate or simply because you are someone with whom they would like to interact. (Langton, Watt, & Bruce, 2000, pp. 51–52) Direction of eye gaze is a crucial medium through which humans and other animals can transmit socially relevant information. In some contexts, the mere establishment of eye contact can be interpreted as a sign of hostility or anger (Argyle & Cook, 1976). Indeed, in many pri- mate societies, staring is deemed to be an unambiguously threatening gesture (Hinde & Rowell, 1962). Yet mutual eye contact can also con- vey positive messages. For example, staring can be taken to be a sign of friendliness, romantic attraction, or general interest (Argyle & Cook, 1976; Kellerman, Lewis, & Laird, 1989; Kleinke, 1986). As von Grünau and Anston (1995) have noted, “whether maintained stare is a sign of dislike or like, it is certainly an indication for a potential social interaction” (p. 1297). Given the acknowledged informational value of eye gaze, it makes sound evolutionary sense that people should be sensitized to eye gaze in others. As gaze direction signals the appearance and relative impor- tance of objects in the environment (e.g., friends, predators, food), considerable adaptive advantages can be gained from an information processing system that is finely tuned to gaze detection and interpreta- tion (see Baron-Cohen, 1994, 1995; Perrett & Emery, 1994). Luckily for the smooth running of everyday life, the available evidence con- firms that people are indeed highly sensitive to gaze direction, an abil- ity that emerges in the very early stages of childhood. Young infants prefer to look at the eyes more than at other regions of the face (Morton & Johnson, 1991) and by the age of 4 months can discriminate staring from averted eyes (Vecera & Johnson, 1995). This fascination with gaze continues into adulthood, particularly with respect to mutual eye con- tact (Baron-Cohen, 1994, 1995). Although this sensitivity to eye gaze undoubtedly serves a variety of useful functions (e.g., reflexive visual orienting; see Driver et al., 1999; Friesen & Kingstone, 1998; Hood, Willen, & Driver, 1998), one function in particular is of considerable social importance. Understanding the nonverbal language of the eyes facilitates the development of social cognition, notably the cognitive and affective construal processes that guide people’s daily interactions with others (see Baron-Cohen, 1994, 1995; Perrett & Emery, 1994). EYE GAZE AND SOCIAL COGNITION An intriguing account of the role that eye gaze may play in social cognition has been offered by Baron-Cohen (1995) in his writings on mind reading (i.e., theory of mind). According to Baron-Cohen (1994, 1995), the mind contains a series of specialized modules that have evolved to enable humans to attribute mental states to others (see also Brothers, 1990). One of these modules, the eye-direction detector (EDD), deals explicitly with gaze detection and interpretation and plays a critical role in the development of social cognition. In sum- mary, the EDD has three basic functions: It (a) detects the presence of eyes or eyelike stimuli in the environment, (b) computes the direction of gaze (e.g., direct or averted), and (c) attributes the mental state of “seeing” to the gazer. As Baron-Cohen (1995) put it, the “EDD is a mindreading mechanism specific to the visual system; it computes whether there are eyes out there and, if so, whether those eyes are looking at me or looking at not-me” (p. 43). Such a system is believed to occupy a pivotal role in everyday social interaction. Indeed, without the ability to read the language of the eyes, perceivers would find it difficult to adopt the “intentional stance” (Dennett, 1987) when inter- preting the actions of others (Baron-Cohen, 1994, 1995). Whether or not one endorses the view that the mind contains an EDD or some functionally equivalent module (e.g., direction of atten- tion detector , DAD; see Perrett & Emery, 1994), it is apparent that a specialized processing system deals with the problem of gaze detec- tion and interpretation. Electrophysiological research has suggested that such a system may be localized in the superior temporal sulcus (STS; see Allison, Puce, & McCarthy, 2000; Haxby, Hoffman, & Gob- bini, 2000; Hoffman & Haxby, 2000). A number of early studies iden- tified cells in areas of temporal cortex that were highly receptive to facial stimuli (Bruce, Desimone, & Gross, 1981; Perrett, Rolls, & Cann, 1982). In subsequent research, Perrett and his colleagues lo- cated specific cells in the STS that responded selectively to the direc- tion of gaze (Perrett et al., 1985). In particular, whereas some cells were tuned to eye contact, others were tuned to detect averted gaze. As Address correspondence to Neil Macrae, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Moore Hall, Hanover, NH 03755; e-mail: c.n.macrae@dartmouth.edu.