Factors influencing the processing of visual information from non‐verbal communications

Abstract

Aims: This paper examines the relationship between observational behavior and the observers' result assumptions, using a contained diagram that includes significant non-verbal information, such as gestures. The ability of care workers to assess a patient's mental status on the basis of nonverbal information would be considered an important skill necessary to understanding patient condition. Methods:One hundred and eleven subjects were asked to take a test exploring two types of psychological status, and their eye movements were monitored during testing. Path analysis was used to examine the relationships among eye movements, individual personalities, and test results. Results:In stimulus 1, the neuroticism of the personality was determined. In stimulus 2, openness was determined in the range of eye movement. There is a relationship between the total length of eye fixation time and the answer time at the eye fixation point. Although there was no significant influence found in stimulus 1, the openness still tended to influence the eye fixation point. Conclusions:The eye fixation point increased among those people with high openness scores. It was theorized that they attempted to obtain information from the stimulus being provided.Key words: eye movement, NEO, non-verbal communication, psychological status, visual information. T HE ABILITY TO interpret non-verbal information, including facial expressions and gestures, to determine someone's state of mind is a very important skill in mental health-care settings. It is often difficult for mentally ill people to verbally express their condition. Therefore, professionals must provide patients with an environment that allows patients to more easily express their condition; professionals must also gain insight into different conditions and desires through observation. The observation act has two stages. In the first stage, perception comes from the sensory feeling receptor. Alternatively, the recognition in the second stage involves processing the perceived information and deriving meaning from it.With regard to the first phase, the sensory receptor refers to the five human senses: sight, touch, smell, hearing, and taste. People always communicate with each other, not only with words, but also by sending and receiving information through the five senses. This paper therefore focused on the visual information that becomes the center of perception for nonverbal information. A large and growing body of literature has reported on people's psychological status using visual information. Such research has

Role of Personality in Construction Safety: Investigating the Relationships between Personality, Attentional Failure, and Hazard Identification under Fall-Hazard Conditions

“…The results of the present study show that people with higher scores on openness traits returned their attention to the hazardous areas of scenes more frequently than people with lower scores on openness personality traits, perhaps suggesting that individuals who scored higher on openness actively sought information in the surrounding environment by processing the cues longer and in a more in-depth manner. This finding is in line with the findings of Matsumoto et al (2010) and Rauthmann et al (2012), which indicated that highly open individuals allocate more attention and deeper processing to the scene to obtain information from the hazardous stimulus. The current results might also reasonably be viewed from the standpoint of how the personal attribute of openness relates to providing a balance between focusing and distributing attention (i.e., the balance between fixation and run count).…”

Application of eye‐tracking in nursing research: A scoping review

“…Twelve studies applied eye‐tracking to explore nursing students’ visual attention among different tasks. Eye‐tracking was used to assess the effect of communication training (Anbro et al., 2020 ), clinical bioethics decision‐making of nursing students (Fernandes et al., 2017 ), students’ visual behaviours and cognition engagement in simulated/virtual reality teaching (Amster et al., 2015 ; Dubovi, 2022 ; Groepel et al., 2022 ), factors influencing visual processing of non‐verbal communication (Matsumoto et al., 2010 ), communication skills training (Kobayashi et al., 2022 ), predict students’ self‐confidence (Vatral et al., 2023 ), students’ management of and response to interruptions (Vital & Nathanson, 2023 ), feasibility of eye‐tracking in simulated teaching, and the role of different visual interfaces in virtual teaching (Pence et al., 2014 ) as a method of feedback during students’ learning (Browning et al., 2016 ; O'Meara et al., 2015 ).…”

“…Thirty studies included nursing students as participants. Nineteen studies included not only nurses and nursing students, but also participants outside of these two, involving doctors (Broadbent et al., 2014 ; Chen & Law, 2023 ; Cui et al., 2022 ; Fogarasi et al., 2010 ; Law & Schmolzer, 2020 ; Valek et al., 2022 ), other medical students (Anbro et al., 2020 ; Browning et al., 2016 ; Groepel et al., 2022 ; Matsumoto et al., 2010 ; O'Meara et al., 2015 ; Wagner et al., 2022 ), technical associates & emergency service associates (Henneman et al., 2010 ), respiratory therapists (Chen & Law, 2023 ; Law et al., 2018 ; Law & Schmolzer, 2020 ), administrators (Cui et al., 2022 ). See Appendix S3 – population for details.…”

Eye tracking in the wild: Piloting a real-life assessment paradigm for older adults

“…suggested that individual differences in personality such as anxiety (Paulitzki, Risko, Oakman, & Stolz, 2008) or loneliness (Wilkowski, Robinson, & Friesen, 2009) influence various forms of attention (e.g., task switching or gazetriggered orienting; see also Kaspar & König, 2012, for a review). With regard to the Big Five personality traits, participants with higher levels of openness showed increased durations of fixations to the eyes of an individual who sat opposite the participants (Matsumoto, Shibata, Seiji, Mori, & Shioe, 2010). According to the authors, a possible explanation may be that individuals who show higher levels of openness attempt to obtain information from the other person.…”