情绪范畴在感知模糊面部表情时调节了解释偏差。

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Perception Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-10 DOI:10.1177/03010066231186936
Emily Todd, Shaini Subendran, George Wright, Kun Guo
{"title":"情绪范畴在感知模糊面部表情时调节了解释偏差。","authors":"Emily Todd,&nbsp;Shaini Subendran,&nbsp;George Wright,&nbsp;Kun Guo","doi":"10.1177/03010066231186936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In contrast to prototypical facial expressions, we show less perceptual tolerance in perceiving vague expressions by demonstrating an interpretation bias, such as more frequent perception of anger or happiness when categorizing ambiguous expressions of angry and happy faces that are morphed in different proportions and displayed under high- or low-quality conditions. However, it remains unclear whether this interpretation bias is specific to emotion categories or reflects a general negativity versus positivity bias and whether the degree of this bias is affected by the valence or category of two morphed expressions. These questions were examined in two eye-tracking experiments by systematically manipulating expression ambiguity and image quality in fear- and sad-happiness faces (Experiment 1) and by directly comparing anger-, fear-, sadness-, and disgust-happiness expressions (Experiment 2). We found that increasing expression ambiguity and degrading image quality induced a general negativity versus positivity bias in expression categorization. The degree of negativity bias, the associated reaction time and face-viewing gaze allocation were further manipulated by different expression combinations. It seems that although we show a viewing condition-dependent bias in interpreting vague facial expressions that display valence-contradicting expressive cues, it appears that the perception of these ambiguous expressions is guided by a categorical process similar to that involved in perceiving prototypical expressions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49708,"journal":{"name":"Perception","volume":"52 10","pages":"695-711"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/f2/10.1177_03010066231186936.PMC10510303.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emotion category-modulated interpretation bias in perceiving ambiguous facial expressions.\",\"authors\":\"Emily Todd,&nbsp;Shaini Subendran,&nbsp;George Wright,&nbsp;Kun Guo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03010066231186936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In contrast to prototypical facial expressions, we show less perceptual tolerance in perceiving vague expressions by demonstrating an interpretation bias, such as more frequent perception of anger or happiness when categorizing ambiguous expressions of angry and happy faces that are morphed in different proportions and displayed under high- or low-quality conditions. However, it remains unclear whether this interpretation bias is specific to emotion categories or reflects a general negativity versus positivity bias and whether the degree of this bias is affected by the valence or category of two morphed expressions. These questions were examined in two eye-tracking experiments by systematically manipulating expression ambiguity and image quality in fear- and sad-happiness faces (Experiment 1) and by directly comparing anger-, fear-, sadness-, and disgust-happiness expressions (Experiment 2). We found that increasing expression ambiguity and degrading image quality induced a general negativity versus positivity bias in expression categorization. The degree of negativity bias, the associated reaction time and face-viewing gaze allocation were further manipulated by different expression combinations. It seems that although we show a viewing condition-dependent bias in interpreting vague facial expressions that display valence-contradicting expressive cues, it appears that the perception of these ambiguous expressions is guided by a categorical process similar to that involved in perceiving prototypical expressions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49708,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perception\",\"volume\":\"52 10\",\"pages\":\"695-711\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/f2/10.1177_03010066231186936.PMC10510303.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066231186936\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perception","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066231186936","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与原型面部表情相比,我们在感知模糊表情时表现出较少的感知容忍度,表现出解释偏见,例如在对以不同比例变形并在高质量或低质量条件下显示的愤怒和快乐面部的模糊表情进行分类时,更频繁地感知愤怒或快乐。然而,目前尚不清楚这种解释偏见是特定于情绪类别,还是反映了普遍的消极与积极偏见,以及这种偏见的程度是否受到两种变体表达的效价或类别的影响。在两个眼动追踪实验中,通过系统地操纵恐惧和悲伤幸福表情中的表情模糊性和图像质量(实验1),以及通过直接比较愤怒、恐惧、悲伤和厌恶幸福表情(实验2),对这些问题进行了检验。我们发现,表达歧义的增加和图像质量的降低导致了表达分类中普遍存在的消极与积极偏见。消极偏见的程度、相关的反应时间和面部注视的分配通过不同的表情组合进一步操纵。似乎,尽管我们在解释模糊的面部表情时表现出了依赖于观看条件的偏见,这些表情显示出与表达线索相矛盾的效价,但对这些模糊表情的感知似乎是由一个类似于感知原型表情的分类过程引导的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Emotion category-modulated interpretation bias in perceiving ambiguous facial expressions.

Emotion category-modulated interpretation bias in perceiving ambiguous facial expressions.

Emotion category-modulated interpretation bias in perceiving ambiguous facial expressions.

Emotion category-modulated interpretation bias in perceiving ambiguous facial expressions.

In contrast to prototypical facial expressions, we show less perceptual tolerance in perceiving vague expressions by demonstrating an interpretation bias, such as more frequent perception of anger or happiness when categorizing ambiguous expressions of angry and happy faces that are morphed in different proportions and displayed under high- or low-quality conditions. However, it remains unclear whether this interpretation bias is specific to emotion categories or reflects a general negativity versus positivity bias and whether the degree of this bias is affected by the valence or category of two morphed expressions. These questions were examined in two eye-tracking experiments by systematically manipulating expression ambiguity and image quality in fear- and sad-happiness faces (Experiment 1) and by directly comparing anger-, fear-, sadness-, and disgust-happiness expressions (Experiment 2). We found that increasing expression ambiguity and degrading image quality induced a general negativity versus positivity bias in expression categorization. The degree of negativity bias, the associated reaction time and face-viewing gaze allocation were further manipulated by different expression combinations. It seems that although we show a viewing condition-dependent bias in interpreting vague facial expressions that display valence-contradicting expressive cues, it appears that the perception of these ambiguous expressions is guided by a categorical process similar to that involved in perceiving prototypical expressions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Perception
Perception 医学-心理学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
74
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Perception is a traditional print journal covering all areas of the perceptual sciences, but with a strong historical emphasis on perceptual illusions. Perception is a subscription journal, free for authors to publish their research as a Standard Article, Short Report or Short & Sweet. The journal also publishes Editorials and Book Reviews.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信