The Uncanny Valley: Effect of Realism on the Impression of Artificial Human Faces

By Jun'ichiro Seyama, R. S. Nagayama. Presence - Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 2007

605 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/37440fe96af3225859678b79328d5a78892a4470

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

3D Virtual worlds and the metaverse: Current status and future possibilities (2013, background): “The phenomenon, observable in both computer-generated characters and humanoid physical devices, suggests that recognizing “full humanity” may involve a diverse collection of factors, including sensory subtleties, emotional or empathetic tendencies, diverse behaviors, and perceptual mechanisms for pr”
Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices (2010, background): “…uncanny valley typically manipulate as an independent variable a character's ''objective " humanness—the human photorealism of the character's morphology, skin texture, motion quality, or other formal property (MacDorman, Coram, Ho, & Patel, 2010; MacDorman et al., 2009; Seyama & Nagayama, 2007).”
Examining the effects of robots' physical appearance, warmth, and competence in frontline services: The Humanness‐Value‐Loyalty model (2021, background): “…attribute objects human mind ‐ like abilities depending on the level of human ‐ likeness (Krach et al., 2008; Rosenthal ‐ von der Püthen & Kramer, 2014), where human ‐ likeness is defined as the extent to which the robot's physical appearance is similar to a human being (Seyama & Nagayama, 2007).”
The thing that should not be: predictive coding and the uncanny valley in perceiving human and humanoid robot actions (2011, background): “One key issue is what artificial agents should look like (MacDorman and Ishiguro, 2006; Seyama and Nagayama, 2007; Kanda et al., 2008).”
The Development of the Uncanny Valley in Infants (2011, methodology): “Adults find an uncanny looking face (i.e., with abnormally large eyes) more unpleasant to look at than a realistic face without abnormal features (MacDorman et al., 2009; Seyama & Nagayama, 2007).”
Individual differences predict sensitivity to the uncanny valley (2015, neutral): “…Schoenherr, & Lacroix, 2013; Lewkowicz & Ghazanfar, 2012; MacDorman, Green, Ho, & Koch, 2009; MacDorman & Ishiguro, 2006; Mitchell, Ho, Patel, & MacDorman, 2011; Seyama & Nagayama, 2007; Steckenfinger & Ghazanfar, 2009; Tinwell, Abdel Nabi, & Charlton, 2013; Tinwell, Grimshaw, & Williams, 2011).”
Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces (2009, background): “Seyama and Nagayama (2007) reported that, for photorealistic facial textures, enlarged eyes greatly increased eeriness.”
IM2CAD (2016, background): “practice for scene optimization and creates visually pleasant renderings without falling into the uncanny valley [40] (see results in Figure 8).”
Categorization difficulty is associated with negative evaluation in the “uncanny valley” phenomenon (2013, background): “The results reported here were inconsistent with those of a previous study by Seyama and Nagayama (2007); although they conducted rating experiments that were similar to the present study, they did not obtain a clear decrement of evaluation of morphed images.”
Feeling robots and human zombies: mind perception and the uncanny valley. (2012, background): “Some suggest humanlike robots may be unnerving because they remind people of death (MacDorman & Ishiguro, 2006), while others suggest that the unnervingness of humanlike robots may stem from abnormal facial features (Seyama & Nagayama, 2007).”