Cited by 231Social Robot Interaction and HRIFace Recognition and PerceptionVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Does the uncanny valley exist? An empirical test of the relationship between eeriness and the human likeness of digitally created faces

Burleigh, Tyler J., Schoenherr, Jordan R., Lacroix, Guy L.·2013·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.021

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burleigh, T. J., Schoenherr, J. R., & Lacroix, G. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Guelph (CA)
  • Carleton University (CA)
Corresponding author
Burleigh, Tyler J.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
759-771
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2008423926
Cited by
231
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 3
FWCI
24.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
uncanny valley, human-likeness, eeriness, negative affect, facial proportions, polygon count, skin coloration, category membership

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review