Watching Eyes Effect Research Articles

Watching eyes effect: the impact of imagined eyes on prosocial behavior and satisfactions in the dictator game.

The concept of the watching eyes effect suggests that the presence of eye or eye-like cues can influence individual altruistic behavior. However, few studies have investigated the effects of imagined eyes on altruistic behaviors and the psychological measures of dictators and recipients in the dictator game. This study used a 2 (Presentation Mode: Imagined/Visual) 2 (Cue Type: Eye/Flower) between-subject design and measured the effects of recipients' psychological variables and the communication texts between the dictator and the recipient. The results showed that there was a significant interaction between Presentation Mode and Cue Type. In the imagined condition, the dictator exhibited more altruistic behavior than in the visual condition. However, there was no significant difference in altruistic behavior between the Imagined Eye and Imagined Flower conditions. In addition, the study found that the Cue Type had a significant main effect on the recipients' satisfaction with the allocation outcome. Notably, in the Visual Flower condition, the dictator used more egoistic norm words when communicating with the recipient than other conditions. This study provides novel evidence on the effect of imagined social cues on individual behavior in the dictator game, and to some extent validates the robustness of the watching eyes effect under manipulation of higher-level verbal cognitive processes. At the same time, the study is the first to explore the impacts on recipients' psychological variables and the communication texts. These efforts offer new insights into the psychological and cognitive mechanisms underlying the watching eyes effect.

Revisiting the Watching Eyes Effect: How Emotional Expressions, Sex, and Age of Watching Eyes Influence Stereotypical Statement Endorsement

Abstract The watching eyes effect has been shown to influence prosocial and antisocial behaviors. However, the eye characteristics which induce this effect remain unclear. This study explored how emotional expressions (anger, fear, happy, neutral), age (old, young), and sex (male, female) of eye images affect antisocial behavior, measured by stereotype endorsement. Participants rated their endorsement of 36 stereotype statements about race, gender, and religion topics, each paired with an eye image. Our findings indicated that stereotype endorsement did not differ significantly between neutral eye images and control flower images. We then used neutral eyes as control images to evaluate stereotype endorsement when being watched by eyes with other expressions. When comparing endorsement across age and sex in each expression, the data revealed higher endorsement for angry old male eyes and for happy young eyes (males and females), and lower endorsement for fearful eyes, except for old fearful female eyes. Therefore, varying the emotional expression, sex, and age of the eye images used in the watching eyes effect paradigm influences stereotype endorsement. To further unravel the underlying mechanisms behind the watching eyes effect, we encourage future research to explore how varying characteristics of the eyes affect responses/behaviors like stereotype endorsement.

“Watching Eyes” Do Not Strengthen the Behavioral Intention of Donating Blood: A High-Powered Pre-registered Replication Study

Previous studies have demonstrated that eye-like images promote prosocial behavior and reduce antisocial behavior (watching-eyes effect). However, several recent reports of replication failure have called into question the replicability of the watching-eyes effect. It also remains unclear whether eye-like images promote prosocial tendencies or norm compliance. In this study, we attempted to replicate the watching-eyes effect on the behavioral intention of blood donation and examined the moderation effect of social norms in a high-powered pre-registered experiment. Participants were 1408 Japanese adults. A 2 × 2 (image: eye, control; norm: pro-donation, neutral) between-participants design was used. Participants first read an essay on either the importance of donating blood or a neutral topic. Then they reported their behavioral intention to donate blood while observing an eye-like or control image. The results showed non-significant effects of eye-like images and no interaction between eyes and norms. However, interestingly, our exploratory analysis suggests the possibility that the watching-eyes effect emerges only under specific contexts. We discuss the interpretations of the results and implications for future research.

Reputation Reminders: When do Eye Cues Promote Prosocial Behavior?

The watching eyes effect has gained significant attention in recent years both from scientists and from policy makers and professionals in the field. The phenomenon posits that the mere presence of eye cues can promote prosocial behavior. However, there is a growing debate about the generality of the effect across various measures and contexts. This review seeks to combine various distinct -and formerly isolated- perspectives by identifying four key components for effective interventions based on the watching eyes effect: Anonymity, crowdedness, costs, and exposure. Eye cues need to reduce perceived anonymity, be placed in non-crowded places, target low-cost prosocial acts and appear for a short amount of time. Next to these conditions, we discuss implications for other cues to reputation and recommend directions that will stimulate further research and applications in society.

Instability of the watching eyes effect and perceived norms: A new perspective

Instability of the watching eyes effect and perceived norms: A new perspective

No effect of 'watching eyes': An attempted replication and extension investigating individual differences.

Some evidence suggests that people behave more cooperatively and generously when observed or in the presence of images of eyes (termed the ‘watching eyes’ effect). Eye images are thought to trigger feelings of observation, which in turn motivate people to behave more cooperatively to earn a good reputation. However, several recent studies have failed to find evidence of the eyes effect. One possibility is that inconsistent evidence in support of the eyes effect is a product of individual differences in sensitivity or susceptibility to the cue. In fact, some evidence suggests that people who are generally more prosocial are less susceptible to situation-specific reputation-based cues of observation. In this paper, we sought to (1) replicate the eyes effect, (2) replicate the past finding that people who are dispositionally less prosocial are more responsive to observation than people who are more dispositionally more prosocial, and (3) determine if this effect extends to the watching eyes effect. Results from a pre-registered study showed that people did not give more money in a dictator game when decisions were made public or in the presence of eye images, even though participants felt more observed when decisions were public. That is, we failed to replicate the eyes effect and observation effect. An initial, but underpowered, interaction model suggests that egoists give less than prosocials in private, but not public, conditions. This suggests a direction for future research investigating if and how individual differences in prosociality influence observation effects.

"Watching Eyes" Triggers Third-Party Punishment: The Role of Emotion Within the Eyes.

Third-party punishment refers to a behavioral phenomenon whereby people punish wrongdoers even if their sanction incurs personal costs but yields no direct benefits. Given the eye cues demonstrated ability to convey signals of being observed, its effect on third-party punishment, driven by virtue of its effects on others' perceptions, was investigated. In addition, emotional message featured in the eye region is crucial in social interaction, whether the emotion within the eyes serves this effect with varying degrees of influence has rarely considered. The present study aimed at exploring (a) the watching eyes effect on the third-party punishment and (b) whether this effect varies from negative eyes to positive eyes. By two experiments using a modified Third-Party Dictator Game, we displayed either eye images or control images above the question on whether to punish the dictators or not. There was no emotional diversity of eye cues in Experiment 1, and most participants tended to punish for unfair offer. However, the appearance of eye images increased the punishment relative to control images. In Experiment 2, the eye cues were subdivided into positive and negative. The effect of watching eyes on the third-party punishment was significantly stronger when the eyes were negative than positive. Results revealed that eye cues play a role in promoting the third-party punishment and offer a potential insight into the mixed findings, such that the emotion within the eyes, especially the negative expression in the eyes, may influence the watching eyes effect.

The “watching-eyes effect” in cooperative behavior: Potential mechanisms and limiting factors

The “watching-eyes effect” in cooperative behavior: Potential mechanisms and limiting factors

Power of the eyes: deterring sexual harassment in Tokyo subways using images of watchful eyes

AbstractSex crime in subways poses an ever-present threat to Japanese commuters. This paper proposes a simple and viable adjunct to the current tactics by harnessing the potential of the watching eyes effect to deter sexual harassment. It attempts to observe the human biological sensitivity to gaze and to explore its application to the specific Japanese context where powerful informal control exists. The paper also identifies the possible advantages and limitations of such measure, with the goal of stimulating more discussion over evidence-based behavioural interventions in deterring crimes. A tentative proposal is composed to summarize and demonstrate a number of behaviourally informed suggestions regarding the practical implementation and configuration of the proposed measure.

Correction to Matsugasaki et al. (2015)

In the article “Two Failed Replications of the Watching Eyes Effect” by K. Matsugasaki, W. Tsukamoto, & Y. Ohtsubo (Letters on Evolutionary Behavioral Science, 2015, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 17-20, https://doi.org/10.5178/lebs.2015.36), the results section of Study 2 contained errors. The original version read “the proportion of participants who allocated at least one coin to the next participants was .83 (= 20/24) and .96 (= 23/25) in the eye-image and control conditions, respectively, p = .42 by Fisher’s exact test” (in the left column of p. 19). This should read “the proportion of participants who allocated at least one coin to the next participants was .83 (= 20/24) and .92 (= 23/25) in the control and eye-image conditions, respectively, p = .42 by Fisher’s exact test.”

Do ‘watching eyes’ influence antisocial behavior? A systematic review & meta-analysis

Eye cues have been shown to stimulate rapid, reflexive, unconscious processing and in many experimental settings to cue increased prosocial and decreased antisocial behaviour. Eye cues are being widely applied in public policy to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour. Recently, failed replication attempts and two meta-analyses examining the eye cue effect on generosity have raised doubts regarding earlier findings. Much of the wider evidence on eye cues has still not been systematically reviewed, notably that which is most relevant to its practical application: the effect of eye cues on antisocial behaviour. Given the evidence of humans' heightened sensitivity to threat and negative information, we hypothesized that the watching eyes effect would be more consistent in studies examining antisocial behaviour. In our meta-analysis of 15 experiments from 13 research papers we report a reduction in the risk of antisocial behaviour of 35% when eye cues are present. By contrast, systematic reviews have suggested CCTV cameras reduce crime by only 16%. We conclude that there is sufficient evidence of a watching eyes effect on antisocial behaviour to justify their use in the very low-cost and potentially high-impact real-world interventions that are proliferating in public policy, particularly in the UK. Our meta-analysis of 15 experiments involving 2035 participants shows that photographs and/or stylized images of eyes reduced antisocial behaviour by 35%. Our findings support public policy initiatives employing pictures of ‘watching eyes’ to reduce crime. Furthermore, in an age when we are watched more than at any time in modern history – both online and on the street – our findings highlight an urgent need to fully understand the effect that perceived surveillance, feeling watched, has on our decisions and actions.

Eye contact reduces lying

The perception of watching eyes has been found to reduce dishonest behavior. This effect, however, has only been shown in situations where it can be explained by increased adherence to rules and norms, and thus a watching-eyes effect on dishonesty per se has not been demonstrated. Moreover, the effect has been investigated only with images of watching eyes, not in an interactive situation with a live person, which may arguably have different effects on behavior. In the present study, the effect of watching eyes on dishonesty was investigated with an interactive computer game of lying. Participants played the game against a confederate, whom they believed to be another participant. On each trial, they were briefly presented with a view of the confederate, after which they chose whether to lie in the game. The confederate alternated between the use of direct and downward gaze. The results showed that another individual's direct gaze reduced lying in the game. The findings have implications for both everyday and professional situations, such as clinical conversations and police interrogations.

Eyes, More Than Other Facial Features, Enhance Real-World Donation Behavior.

Humans often behave more prosocially when being observed in person and even in response to subtle eye cues, purportedly to manage their reputation. Previous research on this phenomenon has employed the "watching eyes paradigm," in which adults displayed greater prosocial behavior in the presence of images of eyes versus inanimate objects. However, the robustness of the effect of eyes on prosocial behavior has recently been called into question. Therefore, the first goal of the present study was to attempt to replicate this effect. Additionally, it remains unclear whether the watching-eyes effect is driven specifically by reputation management (owing to the monitoring function of the eyes) or whether any cues indexing human presence more generally also have a similar effect. To address these questions, the current study compared prosocial behavior in the presence of eyes versus inanimate objects as well as other human features. The study was conducted as a field experiment at a children's museum. Each week, the donation signs were changed to show eyes, noses, mouths, or chairs. Total donation amount and number of patrons per week were recorded. Participants donated more when they were exposed to eyes than to inanimate objects (chairs). We thus replicated the previously reported watching-eyes effect. Moreover, more money was donated when individuals were exposed to eyes than to more general cues of human presence (nose and mouth). The current findings suggest that eyes play a special role in promoting cooperation in humans, likely by serving as cues of monitoring and thus eliciting reputation management behavior.

No Evidence for the Watching-Eyes Effect on Human Impulsivity.

People often become more altruistic when they think or feel that someone is watching them. Known as the “watching-eyes effect,” this is argued to be caused by the motivation to gain and maintain a positive social reputation as an altruistic individual (the “reputation seeking” mechanism). However, an alternative mechanism underlying the watching-eyes effect could be that people suppress their impulsive tendency to pursue benefit rather than increase their altruism, and this may lead to apparent increases in altruistic tendencies. This “suppressing impulsivity” mechanism is considered intrapersonal rather than socially mediated which is associated with “reputation seeking.” We examined whether the suppressing impulsivity mechanism would be associated with the watching-eyes effect by measuring participants’ impulsivity in the presence of watching-eyes stimuli. In a controlled experiment, we presented life-size pictures of human faces with a direct gaze on a monitor in front of participants taking part in a time-discounting task. Two types of faces, “in-group” (faces of participants’ classmates) and “out-group” (unfamiliar faces) were presented to examine the effect of social attribution. We used a flower picture as a control stimulus. In the time-discounting task, participants chose one of two options: a small amount of money that they could get immediately or a larger amount of money that they could get after a given time interval. The results showed no significant difference in participants’ time-discount rate regardless of the types of stimuli presented during the time-discount task. A post-task questionnaire confirmed that the participants were aware of the presented stimuli and revealed that they paid more attention to the in-group stimuli than to the out-group and flower stimuli, though this difference in attentive states had no effect on their impulsivity during the task. These results suggest that suppressing impulsivity is not a plausible mechanism for the watching-eyes effect. The null effect for the difference between the in-group and out-group stimuli also supports this conclusion. Thus, it is plausible that the watching-eyes effect is caused by the human tendency to boost social reputation and can be mediated by the social relationship with others.

Early Reputation Management: Three-Year-Old Children Are More Generous Following Exposure to Eyes.

To enhance their reputations, adults and even 5-year-old children behave more prosocially when being observed by others. However, it remains unknown whether children younger than five also manage their reputations. One established paradigm for assessing reputation management is the ‘watching eyes paradigm,’ in which adults have been found to be more prosocial in the presence of eyes versus control images. However, the robustness of this effect in adults has recently been called into question, and it has never been demonstrated in children. In Study 1, we used a method similar to that used in prior work: 3- and 5-year-old children took part in a prosocial task while in the presence of an image of eyes or flowers but without explicit mention or reference to the image. With this method, children did not show the watching eyes effect. In Study 2, 3-year-old children were tested with a modified watching eyes paradigm, wherein they first explicitly interacted either with images of eyes or with cloth flowers, and they then engaged in a prosocial task. With this modified watching eyes paradigm, 3-year-olds showed the predicted effect: They were more prosocial following exposure to eyes than flowers. These results offer potential insight into the mixed findings across the adult literature, such that the manner of exposure, and specifically how explicit the exposure is, may influence the watching eyes effect. Finally, no study to date has examined whether cues of human presence other than the eyes also influence prosociality. We found that children in the Mouth condition were prosocial at an intermediate level between the Eyes and Flowers conditions. Overall, the findings point to the remarkably early emergence of reputation management in human ontogeny.

The norm-dependent effect of watching eyes on donation

Abstract Although many previous studies have shown that eye-like images promote generosity, the mechanism of this eyes remains unclear. One possible cause is the concern for a good reputation as a generous person, while the other is the concerns for a bad reputation as a norm violator. To elucidate which of these two concerns is the main influencer, the present study conducted a laboratory experiment that investigated whether the watching eyes effect changed depending on social norms. If the concern for a good reputation leads to the effect, prosocial behavior would be more likely in the presence of watching eyes, regardless of the social norms involved. However, if the concern for avoiding a bad reputation as a norm violator leads to the effect, watching eyes promote prosocial behavior only in the existence of prosocial norms. In the original study, participants were asked to make a charitable donation under conditions in which eye-like images either were or were not present. In addition to the eye-like images, we manipulated prosocial norms by informing each participant of either high or low mean donation amounts given by previous participants. We found that watching eyes promoted donations only when a prosocial norm existed. This supports the idea that the watching eyes effect is caused by a concern for avoiding a bad reputation from violating norms. However, in a replication study, we were unable to replicate the original results; watching eyes did not promote generosity regardless of the norm. Taken together, we discussed the moderation effect of norms and the possibility of other moderators.

No Support for the Watching Eyes Effect Across Three "Lost Letter" Field Experiments

The watching eyes effect has been hotly debated in recent years. Interestingly, field studies often reveal strong effects of eye images on various forms of prosociality. Here, we explored the watching eyes effect on prosociality - in terms of lost letter return rates. We conducted three field experiments, in which we dropped a total of 540 letters in 13 different neighborhoods in the Netherlands (six of high SES and seven of low SES). The envelopes had printed stylized eyes, flowers (or no logo, for Experiments 1 and 2). Combined analysis of all three experiments revealed no significant effect of eye images on lost letter return rates. There was also no interaction between eyes and SES but also no main effect of SES levels on lost letter return rates. Overall, these null results suggest that minimal cues to being watched may not be that powerful in promoting forms of prosociality that entail a certain cost and do not have obvious benefits for the individual, such as return of lost letters.

The watching eyes effect on prosociality

The watching eyes effect on prosociality

The watching eyes effect on charitable donation is boosted by fewer people in the vicinity

Previous field experiments have found that artificial surveillance cues facilitated prosocial behaviors such as charitable donations and littering. Several previous field studies found that the artificial surveillance cue effect was stronger when few individuals were in the vicinity; however, others reported that the effect was stronger in large groups of people. Here, we report the results of a field study examining the effect of an artificial surveillance cue (stylized eyes) on charitable giving. Three collection boxes were placed in different locations around an izakaya (a Japanese-style tavern) for 84 days. The amount donated was counted each experimental day, and the izakaya staff provided the number of patrons who visited each day. We found that the effect of the stylized eyes was more salient when fewer patrons were in the izakaya. Our findings suggest that the effect of the artificial surveillance cue is similar to that of “real” cues and that the effect on charitable giving may weaken when people habituate to being watched by “real” eyes.

The watching-eyes phenomenon and blood donation: Does exposure to pictures of eyes increase blood donation by young adults?

This study examined the effectiveness of exposure to a “watching-eyes image” in increasing blood donation rates among young people, a segment of the population that is particularly underrepresented among blood donors. Participants were 454 first-year university students, each of who was given a blood-donation flyer at the beginning of a lecture. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions depending on whether the flyer they received bore a picture of eyes (experimental condition) or a neutral picture (control condition). We recorded the numbers of participants who promised to give blood and who actually gave blood during the blood drive. Results show that the number of people who gave blood was significantly higher in the experimental condition than in the control condition. These findings provide the first evidence of the effectiveness of the watching-eyes strategy in encouraging young people to give blood. We discuss the processes underlying the “watching-eyes effect” with respect to blood donation.