The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is it the real deal? Perception of virtual characters versus humans: an affective cognitive neuroscience perspective
Open accessAbstract
Recent developments in neuroimaging research support the increased use of naturalistic stimulus material such as film, avatars, or androids. These stimuli allow for a better understanding of how the brain processes information in complex situations while maintaining experimental control. While avatars and androids are well suited to study human cognition, they should not be equated to human stimuli. For example, the uncanny valley hypothesis theorizes that artificial agents with high human-likeness may evoke feelings of eeriness in the human observer. Here we review if, when, and how the perception of human-like avatars and androids differs from the perception of humans and consider how this influences their utilization as stimulus material in social and affective neuroimaging studies. First, we discuss how the appearance of virtual characters affects perception. When stimuli are morphed across categories from non-human to human, the most ambiguous stimuli, rather than the most human-like stimuli, show prolonged classification times and increased eeriness. Human-like to human stimuli show a positive linear relationship with familiarity. Secondly, we show that expressions of emotions in human-like avatars can be perceived similarly to human emotions, with corresponding behavioral, physiological and neuronal activations, with exception of physical dissimilarities. Subsequently, we consider if and when one perceives differences in action representation by artificial agents versus humans. Motor resonance and predictive coding models may account for empirical findings, such as an interference effect on action for observed human-like, natural moving characters. However, the expansion of these models to explain more complex behavior, such as empathy, still needs to be investigated in more detail. Finally, we broaden our outlook to social interaction, where virtual reality stimuli can be utilized to imitate complex social situations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory?
Friston, K. (2010) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2787 · Cited by 8,120 · cited 2×
“Within this virtual environment participants may experience a sense of being there, called “presence” (Slater et al., 2009, 2010).”
BackgroundMethodHow do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness
(Bud) Craig, A. D. (2009) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2555 · Cited by 6,657 · cited 1×
“As discussed previously, the insular cortex has been shown to be involved in a wide variety of tasks, most relating to subjective feelings (Craig, 2009).”
BackgroundBehavioral Study of obedience.
Milgram, S. (1963) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0040525 · Cited by 4,918 · cited 1×
“One such example is the famous Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures, in which participants were instructed to give what they believe are painful electric shocks to another participant each time that participant answers wrongly during a task (Milgram, 1963).”
BackgroundGrasping the intentions of others with one's own mirror neuron system
Iacoboni, M., Molnar-Szakacs, I., Gallese, V., Buccino, G., Mazziotta, J. C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030079 · Cited by 2,044 · cited 1×
“In the decades since its introduction, the notion of a mirror neuron system at the basis of motor perception has been expanded to explain complex behaviors such as imitation, emotion observation, intention, and empathy (Rizzolatti et al., 2001; Wicker et al., 2003; Iacoboni et al., 2005).”
BackgroundIntersubject synchronization of cortical activity during natural vision
Hasson, U., Nir, Y., Levy, I., Fuhrmann, G., & Malach, R. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1089506 · Cited by 1,839
From presence to consciousness through virtual reality.
Sanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1651 · Cited by 1,831
Interoceptive inference, emotion, and the embodied self
Seth, A. K. (2013) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.007 · Cited by 1,816 · cited 1×
“…integration across senses and the generation of affective states in the context of the predictive coding model has been discussed more recently in studies on emotion perception, self-representation and multi-sensory integration (Seth, 2013; Apps and Tsakiris, 2014; Ishida et al., 2014; Sel, 2014).”
Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition
Gauthier, I., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A. W. (2000) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/72140 · Cited by 1,418 · cited 1×
“The fusiform face area (FFA) is not only seen as a region particularly responsive to faces, but as responsive to any fine grained distinctions between expertise-acquired categories (Gauthier et al., 2000).”
BackgroundPredictive coding: an account of the mirror neuron system
Kilner, J. M., Friston, K. J., & Frith, C. D. (2007) · Cognitive Processing · doi:10.1007/s10339-007-0170-2 · Cited by 1,134
It's only a computer: virtual humans increase willingness to disclose
Lucas, G. M., Gratch, J., King, A., & Morency, L.-P. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.043 · Cited by 977 · cited 1×
“Lucas et al. (2014) even take human-virtual character interaction to another level by suggesting that in some particular cases of social interactions virtual characters might be more successful than real humans.”
Background
Cited by
Virtual reality as a clinical tool in mental health research and practice
Bell, I. H., Nicholas, J., Alvarez-Jimenez, M., Thompson, A., & Valmaggia, L. (2020) · Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience · doi:10.31887/dcns.2020.22.2/lvalmaggia · Cited by 302
Embodying self-compassion within virtual reality and its effects on patients with depression
Falconer, C. J., Rovira, A., King, J. A., Gilbert, P., Antley, A., Fearon, P., Ralph, N., Slater, M., & Brewin, C. R. (2016) · BJPsych Open · doi:10.1192/bjpo.bp.115.002147 · Cited by 312
Is the Putative Mirror Neuron System Associated with Empathy? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bekkali, S., Youssef, G. J., Donaldson, P. H., Albein-Urios, N., Hyde, C., & Enticott, P. G. (2021) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-020-09452-6 · Cited by 128
Using deepfakes for experiments in the social sciences - A pilot study
Eberl, A., Kühn, J., & Wolbring, T. (2022) · Frontiers in Sociology · doi:10.3389/fsoc.2022.907199 · Cited by 48
Task type's effect on attitudes towards voice assistants
Sung, B., Im, H., & Duong, V. C. (2023) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12946 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- de Borst, A. W., & de Gelder, B.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2015-05-12
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 576-576
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2139346079
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 17.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is it the real deal? Perception of virtual characters versus humans: an affective cognitive neuroscience perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00576
- The paper
- de Borst, A. W., & de Gelder, B. (2015). Is it the real deal? Perception of virtual characters versus humans: an affective cognitive neuroscience perspective. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00576
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.