Abstract
Gaze is an important and potent social cue to direct others' attention towards specific locations. However, in many situations, directional symbols, like arrows, fulfill a similar purpose. Motivated by the overarching question how artificial systems can effectively communicate directional information, we conducted two cueing experiments. In both experiments, participants were asked to identify peripheral targets appearing on the screen and respond to them as quickly as possible by a button press. Prior to the appearance of the target, a cue was presented in the center of the screen. In Experiment 1, cues were either faces or arrows that gazed or pointed in one direction, but were non-predictive of the target location. Consistent with earlier studies, we found a reaction time benefit for the side the arrow or the gaze was directed to. Extending beyond earlier research, we found that this effect was indistinguishable between the vertical and the horizontal axis and between faces and arrows. In Experiment 2, we used 100% "counter-predictive" cues; that is, the target always occurred on the side opposite to the direction of gaze or arrow. With cues without inherent directional meaning (color), we controlled for general learning effects. Despite the close quantitative match between non-predictive gaze and non-predictive arrow cues observed in Experiment 1, the reaction-time benefit for counter-predictive arrows over neutral cues is more robust than the corresponding benefit for counter-predictive gaze. This suggests that-if matched for efficacy towards their inherent direction-gaze cues are harder to override or reinterpret than arrows. This difference can be of practical relevance, for example, when designing cues in the context of human-machine interaction.