社会注意中的娃娃脸效应：情境的调节作用

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2026.04.001

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

社会互动中人们更加偏爱娃娃脸面孔(即娃娃脸效应)，然而少有研究关注其在早期加工，尤其是社会性注意中的作用。注视线索效应在社会性注意中占据核心地位，故本研究以成人娃娃脸和成熟脸作为刺激材料，通过操纵情境因素考察娃娃脸对注视线索效应的影响。实验1通过组块内设计形成对比情境，结果发现被试更愿意追随女性娃娃脸或男性成熟脸的注视方向。实验2和实验3分别通过组块间设计和情绪性音乐启动构建自下而上和自上而下的情境，结果发现娃娃脸对注视线索效应的调节作用消失。结果表明，情境因素能够消除娃娃脸在社会交互中导致的注意偏向。本研究为eyeTUNE框架提供了实验证据，也有助于在应用层面对娃娃脸的认知效应进行动态调控。

关键词: 娃娃脸效应, 注视线索效应, 社会性注意, 情境

Abstract:

People tend to show a preference for baby-faced individuals over mature-faced ones (the babyface effect). However, little is known about whether and how this bias operates at early stages of processing, particularly within social attention. Given the central role of the gaze cueing effect (GCE) in social attention, the present study examined the influence of baby-facedness on GCE by systematically manipulating contextual factors. In Experiment 1, a within-block design was used to create a contrast context. The results showed that participants were more likely to follow the gaze direction of male mature-faced faces and female baby-faced faces. In contrast, Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 employed a between-block design and emotional music priming to construct bottom-up and top-down contexts, respectively. In both experiments, the modulatory effect of baby-facedness on GCE was no longer observed. These findings indicate that contextual factors can eliminate babyface-related attentional biases in social interactions. The present study provides empirical support for the eyeTUNE framework and offers practical insights for predicting, modulating, and controlling the babyface effect in real-world applications.

Key words: babyface effect, gaze cueing effect, social attention, context

中图分类号:

B842

高云飞, 户晓倩, 王璐瑶, 赵晶晶, 王勇慧. 社会注意中的娃娃脸效应：情境的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2026, 24(4): 433-441.

Yunfei GAO, Xiaoqian HU, Luyao WANG, Jingjing ZHAO, Yonghui WANG. Babyface Effect in Social Attention: The Moderated Effect of Context[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2026, 24(4): 433-441.

图/表 6

图1 实验1流程示意图

图2 实验1各条件下的注视线索效应注：GCE(gaze cueing effect)为注视线索效应；柱状图内的误差线为标准误；*p<0.05，***p<0.001，以下同。

图3 实验2流程示意图注：实验2(非对比情境)条件的试次顺序，其中四类条件下(女性娃娃脸、女性成熟脸、男性娃娃脸、男性成熟脸)的面孔在单独组块中呈现，组块顺序在被试间平衡。

图4 实验2各条件下的注视线索效应注：n.s.代表p>0.05，以下同。

图5 实验3流程示意图

图6 实验3各条件下的注视线索效应

参考文献 0

	窦东徽, 刘肖岑, 张玉洁. 娃娃脸效应: 对婴儿面孔的偏好及过度泛化. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22 (5): 760- 771.
	贾云丞, 丁芳媛, 程刚, 张文, 林楠, 张大均. 婴儿与成人同面孔多表情图库的初步建立. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2019, 33 (12): 918- 924. DOI
	蒋军, 陈雪飞, 陈安涛. 积极情绪对视觉注意的调节及其机制. 心理科学进展, 2011, 19 (5): 701- 711. DOI
	李夏, 朱洁银, 唐骥, 张文秀, 胡凤培. 注视方向和面部表情对注意朝向的影响. 心理科学, 2013, 36 (6): 1339- 1346.
	钱铭怡, 罗珊红, 张光健, 陈萍, 姚萍. 关于性别刻板印象的初步调查. 应用心理学, 1999, 5 (1): 14- 19. DOI
	张美晨, 魏萍, 张钦. 阈上阈下不同面孔表情下的注视线索提示效应. 心理学报, 2015, 47 (11): 1309- 1317.
	Ali, S. O., & Peynircioǧlu, Z. F. Intensity of emotions conveyed and elicited by familiar and unfamiliar music. Music Perception, 2010, 27 (3): 177- 182.
	Baumgartner, T., Esslen, M., & Jäncke, L. From emotion perception to emotion experience: Emotions evoked by pictures and classical music. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 2006, 60 (1): 34- 43. DOI
	Bernstein, M., & Yovel, G. Two neural pathways of face processing: A critical evaluation of current models. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2015, 55 (10): 536- 546. DOI
	Berry, D. S., & McArthur, L. Z. Some components and consequences of a babyface. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1985, 48 (2): 312- 323. DOI
	Bower, G. H. Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 1981, 36 (2): 129- 148.
	Bressan, P., Bertamini, M., Nalli, A., & Zanutto, A. Men do not have a stronger preference than women for self-resemblant child faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2009, 38 (5): 657- 664. DOI
	Campbell, J. I. D., & Thompson, V. A. MorePower 6.0 for ANOVA with relational confidence intervals and Bayesian analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 2012, 44 (4): 1255- 1265. DOI
	Charlesworth, T. E. S., Hudson, S. K. T. J., Cogsdill, E. J., Spelke, E. S., & Banaji, M. R. Children use targets’ facial appearance to guide and predict social behavior. Developmental Psychology, 2019, 55 (7): 1400- 1413. DOI
	Clore, G. L., Gasper, K., & Garvin, E. (2001). Affect as information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 121–144). New York: Psychology Press.
	Dalmaso, M., Castelli, L., & Galfano, G. Social modulators of gaze-mediated orienting of attention: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2020, 27 (5): 833- 855. DOI
	Dalmaso, M., Pavan, G., Castelli, L., & Galfano, G. Social status gates social attention in humans. Biology Letters, 2012, 8 (3): 450- 452. DOI
	Fairhall, S. L., & Ishai, A. Effective connectivity within the distributed cortical network for face perception. Cerebral Cortex, 2007, 17 (10): 2400- 2406. DOI
	Freiwald, W., Duchaine, B., & Yovel, G. Face processing systems: From neurons to real-world social perception. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2016, 39, 325- 346. DOI
	Friedman, H., & Zebrowitz, L. A. The contribution of typical sex differences in facial maturity to sex role stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1992, 18 (4): 430- 438. DOI
	Friesen, C. K., & Kingstone, A. The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1998, 5 (3): 490- 495. DOI
	Friesen, C. K., Ristic, J., & Kingstone, A. Attentional effects of counterpredictive gaze and arrow cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2004, 30 (2): 319- 329. DOI
	Gorn, G. J., Jiang, Y. W., & Johar, G. V. Babyfaces, trait inferences, and company evaluations in a public relations crisis. Journal of Consumer Research, 2008, 35 (1): 36- 49. DOI
	Harris, D. A., Hayes-Skelton, S. A., & Ciaramitaro, V. M. What’s in a face? How face gender and current affect influence perceived emotion. Frontiers in Psychology, 2016, 7, 1468. DOI
	Hayward, D. A., & Ristic, J. The uniqueness of social attention revisited: Working memory load interferes with endogenous but not social orienting. Experimental Brain Research, 2013, 231 (4): 405- 414. DOI
	Hietanen, J. K., Nummenmaa, L., Nyman, M. J., Parkkola, R., & Hämäläinen, H. Automatic attention orienting by social and symbolic cues activates different neural networks: An fMRI study. Neuroimage, 2006, 33 (1): 406- 413. DOI
	Ishikawa, M., Haensel, J. X., Smith, T. J., Senju, A., & Itakura, S. Affective priming enhances gaze cueing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2021, 47 (2): 189- 199. DOI
	Ji, H. Y., Wang, L., & Jiang, Y. Cross-category adaptation of reflexive social attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2020, 149 (11): 2145- 2153. DOI
	Joseph, R. M., Fricker, Z., & Keehn, B. Activation of frontoparietal attention networks by non-predictive gaze and arrow cues. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2015, 10 (2): 294- 301. DOI
	Kleinke, C. L. Gaze and eye contact: A research review. Psychological Bulletin, 1986, 100 (1): 78- 100. DOI
	Krenz, V., Alink, A., Sommer, T., Roozendaal, B., & Schwabe, L. Time-dependent memory transformation in hippocampus and neocortex is semantic in nature. Nature Communications, 2023, 14 (1): 6037. DOI
	Kreutz, G., Ott, U., Teichmann, D., Osawa, P., & Vaitl, D. Using music to induce emotions: Influences of musical preference and absorption. Psychology of Music, 2008, 36 (1): 101- 126. DOI
	Kuhn, G., Pickering, A., & Cole, G. G. “Rare” emotive faces and attentional orienting. Emotion, 2016, 16 (1): 1- 5. DOI
	Marino, B. F. M., Mirabella, G., Actis-Grosso, R., Bricolo, E., & Ricciardelli, P. Can we resist another person’s gaze?. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2015, 9, 258. DOI
	McCall, R. B., & Kennedy, C. B. Attention of 4-month infants to discrepancy and babyishness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1980, 29 (2): 189- 201. DOI
	Pivonkova, V., Rubesova, A., Lindova, J., & Havlicek, J. Sexual dimorphism and personality attributions of male faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2011, 40 (6): 1137- 1143. DOI
	Sato, W., Kochiyama, T., Uono, S., Matsuda, K., Usui, K., Inoue, Y., & Toichi, M. Rapid amygdala gamma oscillations in response to eye gaze. PLoS One, 2011, 6 (11): e28188. DOI
	Song, Y., Luximon, A., & Luximon, Y. The effect of facial features on facial anthropomorphic trustworthiness in social robots. Applied Ergonomics, 2021, 94, 103420. DOI
	Talamini, F., Eller, G., Vigl, J., & Zentner, M. Musical emotions affect memory for emotional pictures. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12 (1): 10636. DOI
	Västfjäll, D. Emotion induction through music: A review of the musical mood induction procedure. Musicae Scientiae, 2001, 5 (Supp1): 173- 211. DOI
	Wang, L., Wang, Y., Xu, Q., Liu, D., Ji, H. Y., Yu, Y. W., … Jiang, Y. Heritability of reflexive social attention triggered by eye gaze and walking direction: Common and unique genetic underpinnings. Psychological Medicine, 2020, 50 (3): 475- 483. DOI
	Wu, R., & Kirkham, N. Z. No two cues are alike: Depth of learning during infancy is dependent on what orients attention. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2010, 107 (2): 118- 136. DOI
	Yang, D. Y. J., Rosenblau, G., Keifer, C., & Pelphrey, K. A. An integrative neural model of social perception, action observation, and theory of mind. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2015, 51, 263- 275. DOI
	Zhang, T. K., Gao, Y. F., Hu, S. S., Xiong, L. J., Cheng, Z. J., Tian, Y. Y., … Wang, Y. H. Focused attention: Its key role in gaze and arrow cues for determining where attention is directed. Psychological Research, 2023, 87 (6): 1966- 1980. DOI
	Zhang, X. Y., Dalmaso, M., Galfano, G., & Castelli, L. Tuning social modulations of gaze cueing via contextual factors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2023, 30 (3): 1004- 1010. DOI
	Zheng, W. W., Luo, T., Hu, C. P., & Peng, K. P. Glued to which face? Attentional priority effect of female babyface and male mature face. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018, 9, 286. DOI

[1]	李萌, 马克健, 宋照祥, 齐铭铭. 定向遗忘促进中性信息情绪贬值[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2025, 23(3): 304-312.
[2]	伊里努尔•热甫卡迪江, 郭晶晶. 语言切换情境对认知控制子成分的适应性作用—来自维−汉−英三语者的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2024, 22(5): 577-584.
[3]	王崇颖, 刘云婷, 孙凌. 社交情境类型对孤独症儿童响应性共同注意心理过程的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2024, 22(4): 538-544.
[4]	孙鹏, 凌晓丽. 社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下双人社会困境中合作行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2023, 21(1): 94-101.
[5]	朱娜平, 王文平, 李丽琼, 刘雁伶. 数量让位价值：5～10岁儿童公平分配发展的“此消彼长”[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 233-239.
[6]	周广方, 魏子晗, 欧阳良媛, Ngure Mary Muthoni, 王晓庄. 描述信息与经验不一致对个体风险选择的影响：决策模型的拟合[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 29-36.
[7]	康廷虎, 王旎撰, 高吴平. 记叙文阅读中主人公转换对情境模型更新的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 1-7.
[8]	张奇勇, 卢家楣. 学生的首因效应对教师情绪感染力的影响：情绪真实性判断的中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 60-66.
[9]	朱鹏, 常若松. 性别和情境危险程度对行人危险知觉的影响：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 113-120.
[10]	李开云, 王思杰, 杨蕙菁, 毕艳, 张文君, 林丰勋. “己之所欲”还是“成人之美”？解释水平视角下个体赠送-接受礼物的偏好不对称性[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 136-144.
[11]	王秀娟, 王梦婷, 韩尚锋, 刘燊, 张林. 风险决策框架下的求助意愿：依恋的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(6): 840-845.
[12]	杨丽娴, 李铃芳, 张锦坤. 妒忌情绪下的定向遗忘效应：基于情境模拟诱发[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(3): 311-317.
[13]	凌晓丽, 孙鹏. 损失情境下社会困境中的合作行为[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(3): 377-383.
[14]	刘仕凡, 连榕, 李涓, 连坤予. 教学情境对教师自动情绪调节的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(2): 209-215.
[15]	侯钰莹, 陈世平, 孟四清. 收益和损失情境中D-E冲突的反射效应和习得速度[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(2): 268-273.