The Feeling of Being Watched: Do Eye Cues Elicit Negative Affect?

Although it is well-established that people tend to be on their best behavior when they know that they are being observed by others (e.g., Ariely, Bracha, & Meier, 2009; Burnham, 2003; van der Linden, 2015; van Rompay, Vonk, & Fransen, 2009; Zajonc, 1965), a growing body of research finds that even artificial surveillance cues, such as images of "watchful eyes" can promote prosocial conduct across a wide range of behavioral domains, from mobilizing citizens to vote (e.g., Panagopoulos, 2014a, 2014b; Panagopolous & van der Linden, 2016) and charitable giving (Bateson, Nettle, & Roberts, 2006; Ernest-Jones et al., 2011) to cooperation in public good dilemmas (e.g., Burnham & Hare, 2007; Haley & Fessler, 2005). One particularly important but currently unresolved question is why false impressions of observability promote prosocial behavior? Humans have a dedicated neural architecture for the detection of facial features (Haxby, Hoffman, & Gobbini, 2000), including the presence of eyes or so-called "gaze detection" (Emery, 2000). Gaze detection is an evolved cognitive mechanism that largely draws on areas of the brain that are not under voluntary control (Driver et al., 1999). Thus, images that merely resemble "watchful" human eyes can be sufficient to trigger the involuntary detection of another's directed gaze (Burnham & Hare, 2007; Mareschal, Calder, & Clifford, 2013). A common explanation for prosocial behavior in response to gaze detection is rooted in the idea that subtle (implicit) social cues of being watched activate reputational concerns that motivate cooperative behavior (Baillon, Selim, & van Dolder, 2013; Haley & Fessler, 2005). Yet, whether people act altruistically out of fear of punishment for violating a norm or because of expectations of potential future rewards remains unclear (c.f., Oda et al., 2011; Oda, Kato, & Hiraishi, 2015). The neural systems responsible for gaze detection likely evolved as a mechanism for (predatory) threat-detection (Haxby, Hoffman, & Gobbini, 2002). Indeed, the ability to recognize danger quickly is evolutionarily adaptive and strongly relies on the preferential processing of dedicated neural circuitry. For example, simple shapes can automatically activate neural networks responsible for threat perception (Larson et al., 2009). In fact, human attention is biased towards emotionally salient stimuli that possess threat-related potential (Ghmann, 2005), of which staring or watchful human eyes are a prime example. Directed gaze is often perceived as aggressive and threatening and commonly elicits negative emotions such as worry and fear (Frischen, Bayliss, & Tipper, 2007; Haxby et al., 2002). Importantly, directed (rather than averted) gaze appears to be driving the watchful-eye effect (Manesi, van Lange, & Pollet, 2016). This dedicated neural circuitry is part of the "social brain. " Humans evolved living in groups and social attention is primarily conveyed by gaze (Emery, 2000). In particular, eyes communicate subtle but crucial signals, such as hints about the intentions and goals of conspecifics (Nummenmaa & Calder, 2009). Humans are dependent on eye cues when it comes to social decision making (Haxby et al., 2002) and watchful eyes have shown to heighten social awareness and self-evaluation (Baltazar et al., 2014; Pfattheicher & Keller, 2015). For example, research shows that the gaze of others can induce social anxiety (Tsuji & Shimada. 2015), especially among people high in need for social approval, who are typically more susceptible to observer-effects (Pfattheicher & Keller, 2015; van Rompay, Vonk, & Fransen, 2009). In short, here we explore the notion that the watchful-eye effect may literally stem from the feeling of being watched. Specifically, if eyespot images indeed trigger implicit (social) threat-perception, we hypothesize that exposure to watchful eyes should lead to the experience of negative affect (e. …