Does Format Matter? Investigating the Impact of Test Format on Facial Emotion Recognition Ability.

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Virginia B Wickline, Heaven Divinity, Bell Wood, Michael Woodcock, Wilkes Jones, Stephen Nowicki
{"title":"Does Format Matter? Investigating the Impact of Test Format on Facial Emotion Recognition Ability.","authors":"Virginia B Wickline, Heaven Divinity, Bell Wood, Michael Woodcock, Wilkes Jones, Stephen Nowicki","doi":"10.1177/00332941251377421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy 2, Adult Faces subtest (DANVA2-AF), a tool that measures accuracy in facial emotion recognition ability, has been used in hundreds of studies in the United States and at least a dozen other countries. Myriad traditional and digital formats have been used in its administration, with the assumption they would produce the same results. The current study investigated whether presentation format impacted error rates, as well as whether participants would score similarly to other individuals in their age group when compared to previously published norms. Eighty-eight university students, faculty, and staff (70% female, 53% European American) were shown each of the basic 24 facial expression photos for 2 seconds then asked to select whether the facial expression was happy, sad, angry, or fearful. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions of the facial emotion recognition test: physical photobook, Qualtrics online survey, and Python computer program. No significant differences were found in the overall error rates by test format. Current results also did not differ from previously published norms. Although these preliminary findings provide initial evidence that DANVA2-AF is robust with comparable findings over the three most frequently used administration formats, continuing evaluation of comparability needs to be done.</p>","PeriodicalId":21149,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Reports","volume":" ","pages":"332941251377421"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Reports","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941251377421","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy 2, Adult Faces subtest (DANVA2-AF), a tool that measures accuracy in facial emotion recognition ability, has been used in hundreds of studies in the United States and at least a dozen other countries. Myriad traditional and digital formats have been used in its administration, with the assumption they would produce the same results. The current study investigated whether presentation format impacted error rates, as well as whether participants would score similarly to other individuals in their age group when compared to previously published norms. Eighty-eight university students, faculty, and staff (70% female, 53% European American) were shown each of the basic 24 facial expression photos for 2 seconds then asked to select whether the facial expression was happy, sad, angry, or fearful. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions of the facial emotion recognition test: physical photobook, Qualtrics online survey, and Python computer program. No significant differences were found in the overall error rates by test format. Current results also did not differ from previously published norms. Although these preliminary findings provide initial evidence that DANVA2-AF is robust with comparable findings over the three most frequently used administration formats, continuing evaluation of comparability needs to be done.

格式重要吗?测验形式对面部情绪识别能力的影响研究。
非语言准确性诊断分析成人面部测试(DANVA2-AF)是一种测量面部情绪识别能力准确性的工具,已在美国和至少十几个其他国家的数百项研究中使用。它的管理中使用了无数的传统格式和数字格式,并假设它们会产生相同的结果。目前的研究调查了演示格式是否会影响错误率,以及与之前公布的规范相比,参与者的得分是否与同龄人相似。88名大学生、教师和工作人员(70%为女性,53%为欧洲裔美国人)观看了24张基本面部表情照片中的每张照片,然后被要求选择面部表情是快乐、悲伤、愤怒还是恐惧。参与者被随机分配到面部情绪识别测试的三种条件中的一种:实体相册、Qualtrics在线调查和Python计算机程序。不同测试格式的总体错误率没有显著差异。目前的结果也与以前公布的规范没有差异。虽然这些初步调查结果提供了初步证据,证明DANVA2-AF在三种最常用的给药格式中具有可比性,但仍需继续评估可比性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Reports
Psychological Reports PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
171
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信