Article published In:
Interaction StudiesVol. 16:2 (2015) ► pp.173–179
The eyes are the window to the uncanny valley
Mind perception, autism and missing souls
Horror movies have discovered an easy recipe for making people creepy: alter their eyes. Instead of normal eyes, zombies’ eyes are vacantly white, vampires’ eyes glow with the color of blood, and those possessed by demons are cavernously black. In the Academy Award winning Pan’s Labyrinth, director Guillermo del Toro created the creepiest of all creatures by entirely removing its eyes from its face, placing them instead in the palms of its hands. The unease induced by altering eyes may help to explain the uncanny valley, which is the eeriness of robots that are almost—but not quite—human (Mori, 1970). Much research has explored the uncanny valley, including the research reported by MacDorman & Entezari (in press), which focuses on individual differences that might predict the eeriness of humanlike robots. In their paper, they suggest that a full understanding of this phenomenon needs to synthesize individual differences with features of the robot. One theory that links these two concepts is mind perception, which past research highlights as essential to the uncanny valley (Gray & Wegner, 2012). Mind perception is linked to both individual differences—autism—and to features of the robot—the eyes—and can provide a deeper understanding of this arresting phenomenon. In this paper, we present original data that links uncanniness to the eyes through aberrant perceptions of mind.
Keywords: robots, emotion, human-computer interaction, theory of mind
Article outline
- 1Mind perception and the uncanny valley
- 2Original research: Eyes, mind perception and uncanniness
- 3Autism and the uncanny valley
- 4Conclusion
-
References
References (18)
Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Jolliffe, & Therese. (1997). Is there a“ language of the eyes”? Evidence from normal adults, and adults with autism or Asperger syndrome. Visual Cognition, 4(3), 311–331.
Carruthers, P., & Smith, P.K. (1996). Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge Univ Press.
Dautenhahn, K., Nehaniv, C.L., Walters, M.L., Robins, B., Kose-Bagci, H., Mirza, N.A., & Blow, M. (2009). KASPAR–a minimally expressive humanoid robot for human–robot interaction research. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics, 6(3–4), 369–397.
Destephe, M., Zecca, M., Hashimoto, & Takanishi, A. (2014, October). Paper presented at
IIEEE-Robotics and Biomimetics Conference
, Bali, Indonesia.
Freud, S. (1919). The uncanny. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Gray, K., Jenkins, A.C., Heberlein, A.S., & Wegner, D.M. (2011). Distortions of mind perception in psychopathology. PNAS, 108(2), 477–479.
Gray, K., & Wegner, D.M. (2012). Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley. Cognition, 125(1), 125–130.
Looser, C.E., & Wheatley, T. (2010). The tipping point of animacy. How, when, and where we perceive life in a face. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1854–1862.
MacDorman, K.F., Green, R.D., Ho, C.-C., & Koch, C.T. (2009). Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 695–710.
Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7(4), 33–35.
Pioggia, G., Ahluwalia, A., Carpi, F., Marchetti, A., Ferro, M., Rocchia, W., & Rossi, D.D. (2004). FACE: Facial automaton for conveying emotions. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics, 1(2), 91–100.
Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., & Dubowski, J. (2006). Does appearance matter in the interaction of children with autism with a humanoid robot? Interaction Studies, 7(3), 509–542.
Scassellati, B. (2007). How social robots will help us to diagnose, treat, and understand autism. In Robotics research (pp. 552–563).
Senju, A., & Johnson, M.H. (2009). Atypical eye contact in autism: Models, mechanisms and development. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 33(8), 1204–1214.
Seyama, J., & Nagayama, R.S. (2007). The uncanny valley: Effect of realism on the impression of artificial human faces. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 16(4), 337–351.
Starmans, C., & Bloom, P. (2012). Windows to the soul: Children and adults see the eyes as the location of the self. Cognition, 123(2), 313–318.
Uljarevic, M., & Hamilton, A. (2013). Recognition of emotions in autism: a formal meta-analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(7), 1517–1526.
Cited by (12)
Cited by 12 other publications
Benjamin, Rachele & Steven J. Heine
2023. From Freud to Android: Constructing a Scale of Uncanny Feelings. Journal of Personality Assessment 105:1 ► pp. 121 ff. 
Delgado, Naira, Simone Mattavelli, Marco Brambilla, Laura Rodríguez-Gómez & Lasana T. Harris
2023. Humanity at first sight: Exploring the relationship between others' pupil size and ascriptions of humanity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 106 ► pp. 104455 ff.
Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, Jens & Mathias Clasen
2023. Creepiness and the Uncanny. Style 57:3 ► pp. 322 ff.
Cassidy, Brittany S., Robert W. Wiley, Mattea Sim & Kurt Hugenberg
2022. Inversion Reduces Sensitivity to Complex Emotions in Eye Regions. Social Cognition 40:3 ► pp. 302 ff.
Saneyoshi, Ayako, Matia Okubo, Hikaru Suzuki, Takato Oyama & Bruno Laeng
2022. The other-race effect in the uncanny valley. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 166 ► pp. 102871 ff.
Yam, Kai Chi, Yochanan Bigman & Kurt Gray
2021. Reducing the uncanny valley by dehumanizing humanoid robots. Computers in Human Behavior 125 ► pp. 106945 ff.
Taylor, Jebediah, Staci Meredith Weiss & Peter J. Marshall
2020. “Alexa, how are you feeling today?”. Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems 21:3 ► pp. 329 ff.
Strait, Megan, Heather L. Urry & Paul Muentener
2019. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), ► pp. 506 ff.
Feng, Shuyuan, Xueqin Wang, Qiandong Wang, Jing Fang, Yaxue Wu, Li Yi, Kunlin Wei & Nicholas Greatorex Riches
2018. The uncanny valley effect in typically developing children and its absence in children with autism spectrum disorders. PLOS ONE 13:11 ► pp. e0206343 ff.
Stein, Jan-Philipp & Peter Ohler
2018. Uncanny…But Convincing? Inconsistency Between a Virtual Agent’s Facial Proportions and Vocal Realism Reduces Its Credibility and Attractiveness, but Not Its Persuasive Success. Interacting with Computers 30:6 ► pp. 480 ff.
Deska, Jason C. & Kurt Hugenberg
2017. The face‐mind link: Why we see minds behind faces, and how others' minds change how we see their face. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 11:12
Strait, Megan K., Victoria A. Floerke, Wendy Ju, Keith Maddox, Jessica D. Remedios, Malte F. Jung & Heather L. Urry
2017. Understanding the Uncanny: Both Atypical Features and Category Ambiguity Provoke Aversion toward Humanlike Robots. Frontiers in Psychology 8
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.