The center of a face catches the eye in face perception.

Using the "Don't look" (DL) paradigm, wherein participants are asked not to look at a specific feature (i.e., eye, nose, and mouth), we previously documented that Easterners struggled to completely avoid fixating on the eyes and nose. Their underlying mechanisms for attractiveness may differ because the fixations on the eyes were triggered only reflexively, whereas fixations on the nose were consistently elicited. In this study, we predominantly focused on the nose, where the center-of-gravity (CoG) effect, which refers to a person's tendency to look near an object's CoG, could be confounded. Full-frontal and mid-profile faces were used because the latter's CoG did not correspond to the nose location. Although we hypothesized that these two effects are independent, the results indicated that, in addition to the successful tracing of previous studies, the CoG effect explains the nose-attracting effect. This study not only reveals this explanation but also raises a question regarding the CoG effect on Eastern participants.

Comparison of peripersonal space in front and rear spaces.

The space immediately around the body, referred to as the peripersonal space (PPS), plays a crucial role in interactions with external objects and in avoiding unsafe situations. This study aimed to investigate whether the size of the PPS changes depending on direction, with a particular focus on the disparity between the front and rear spaces. A vibrotactile stimulus was presented to measure PPS while a task-irrelevant auditory stimulus (probe) approached the participant. In addition, to evaluate the effect of the probe, a baseline condition was used in which only tactile stimuli were presented. The results showed that the auditory facilitation effect of the tactile stimulus was greater in the rear condition than in the front condition. Conversely, the performance on tasks related to auditory distance perception and sound speed estimation did not differ between the two directions, indicating that the difference in the auditory facilitation effect between directions cannot be explained by these factors. These findings indicate that the strength of audio-tactile integration is greater in the rear space compared to the front space, suggesting that the representation of the PPS differed between the front and rear spaces.

Association between visuo-spatial working memory and gait motor imagery.

Although motor imagery and working memory (WM) appear to be closely linked, no previous studies have demonstrated direct evidence for the relationship between motor imagery and WM abilities. This study investigated the association between WM and gait motor imagery and focused on the individual differences in young adults. This study included 33 participants (mean age: 22.2 ± 0.9 years). We used two methods to measure the ability of different WM domains: verbal and visuo-spatial WM. Gait motor imagery accuracy was assessed via the mental chronometry paradigm. We measured the times participants took to complete an actual and imagined walk along a 5 m walkway, with three different path widths. The linear mixed effects model analysis revealed that visuo-spatial WM ability was a significant predictor of the accuracy of gait motor imagery, but not of verbal WM ability. Specifically, individuals with lower visuo-spatial WM ability demonstrated more inaccuracies in the difficult path-width conditions. However, gait motor imagery was not as accurate as actual walking even in the easiest path width or in participants with high visuo-spatial WM ability. Further, visuo-spatial WM ability was significantly correlated with mental walking but not with actual walking. These results suggest that visuo-spatial WM is related to motor imagery rather than actual movement.