↓ Skip to main content

Facial Cosmetics Exert a Greater Influence on Processing of the Mouth Relative to the Eyes: Evidence from the N170 Event-Related Potential Component

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Facial Cosmetics Exert a Greater Influence on Processing of the Mouth Relative to the Eyes: Evidence from the N170 Event-Related Potential Component
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01359
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hideaki Tanaka

Abstract

Cosmetic makeup significantly influences facial perception. Because faces consist of similar physical structures, cosmetic makeup is typically used to highlight individual features, particularly those of the eyes (i.e., eye shadow) and mouth (i.e., lipstick). Though event-related potentials have been utilized to study various aspects of facial processing, the influence of cosmetics on specific ERP components remains unclear. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between the application of cosmetic makeup and the amplitudes of the P1 and N170 event-related potential components during facial perception tasks. Moreover, the influence of visual perception on N170 amplitude, was evaluated under three makeup conditions: Eye Shadow, Lipstick, and No Makeup. Electroencephalography was used to monitor 17 participants who were exposed to visual stimuli under each these three makeup conditions. The results of the present study subsequently demonstrated that the Lipstick condition elicited a significantly greater N170 amplitude than the No Makeup condition, while P1 amplitude was unaffected by any of the conditions. Such findings indicate that the application of cosmetic makeup alters general facial perception but exerts no influence on the perception of low-level visual features. Collectively, these results support the notion that the application of makeup induces subtle alterations in the processing of facial stimuli, with a particular effect on the processing of specific facial components (i.e., the mouth), as reflected by changes in N170 amplitude.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Researcher 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 42%
Linguistics 2 8%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Computer Science 2 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 April 2018.
All research outputs
#8,365,136
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,952
of 35,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,463
of 349,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#198
of 401 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 349,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 401 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.