Humans are good at recognizing familiar faces, but more error-prone an unfamiliar person across different images. It has been suggested that and faces processed qualitatively differently. But least differently from monkey faces? Here we tested 366 volunteers on a face matching test – two images presented side-by-side with participants judging whether the show same identity or identities compari...

Accumulating behavioral and neurophysiological studies support the idea of infantile (cute) faces as highly biologically relevant stimuli rapidly and unconsciously capturing attention and eliciting positive/affectionate behaviors, including willingness to care. It has been hypothesized that the presence of infantile physical and behavioral features in companion (or pet) animals (i.e., dogs and ...

Radial, space-filling (RSF) techniques for hierarchy visualization have several advantages over traditional node-link diagrams, including the ability to efficiently use the display space while effectively conveying the hierarchy structure. Several RSF systems and tools have been developed to date, each with varying degrees of support for interactive operations such as selection and navigation. ...

1 This research has been supported by the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), the Russell Sage Foundation (RSF), and the Berkeley Center of Chinese Studies (CCS). We would like to thank the Education Bureau of the Beijing’s Eastern City District, the Institute of Higher Education of Tsinghua University, and the Data Sea Survey Institute for their support while in China. 2 Corresponding auth...

Recognition for human faces, monkey faces, and objects was assessed in both adult humans (Homo sapiens) and monkeys (Macaca mulatta) with a visual paired-comparison task. The results demonstrated that while both species showed strong novelty preference for objects, human participants showed novelty preference for human faces but not for monkey faces, and vice versa for the monkeys. This `specie...