面具对脑诱发电位识别面部表情的影响研究。

Baijun Song, Tomohiko Igasaki, Saori Nishikawa
{"title":"面具对脑诱发电位识别面部表情的影响研究。","authors":"Baijun Song, Tomohiko Igasaki, Saori Nishikawa","doi":"10.1109/EMBC53108.2024.10782072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is little physiological evidence on mechanisms of facial expression recognition, which involves visual processing, feature extraction, emotion-processing, and cognitive integration. Therefore, this study aims to delve into the cerebral mechanisms underlying facial expression recognition using evoked potentials and understand how face masks affect these processes. We recorded the behavioral psychological and electrophysiological responses to facial expression stimuli: behavioral measures (accuracy and response time) and evoked potentials at 19 sites, which were measured in 12 subjects, corresponding to the type of facial expression and mask presence. The latencies and amplitudes of the five components (P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3) were analyzed at each site. For the behavioral measures, repeated two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that accuracy was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and the presence of a mask (p < 0.01), with an interaction effect (p < 0.001). Response time was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and interaction (p < 0.01), however, it was not affected by the presence of a mask (p > 0.05). For evoked potentials, there were no significant differences in latency and amplitude for each site and component by type of facial expression (p > 0.05, one-way ANOVA). Nevertheless, there were significant differences in latency and amplitude for many sites and components with and without masks (p < 0.05, paired t-test). In addition, repeated two-way ANOVA revealed an interaction (p < 0.05) between N1 latency at F3, T3, C3, and Pz. In total, all these results suggest that the presence of a mask affects cognitive processing, and the presence of a mask for the type of facial expression affects central resources, both from a behavioral psychological and electrophysiological point of view.</p>","PeriodicalId":72237,"journal":{"name":"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference","volume":"2024 ","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect Investigation of Mask on Facial Expression Recognition Using Cerebral Evoked Potentials.\",\"authors\":\"Baijun Song, Tomohiko Igasaki, Saori Nishikawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/EMBC53108.2024.10782072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There is little physiological evidence on mechanisms of facial expression recognition, which involves visual processing, feature extraction, emotion-processing, and cognitive integration. Therefore, this study aims to delve into the cerebral mechanisms underlying facial expression recognition using evoked potentials and understand how face masks affect these processes. We recorded the behavioral psychological and electrophysiological responses to facial expression stimuli: behavioral measures (accuracy and response time) and evoked potentials at 19 sites, which were measured in 12 subjects, corresponding to the type of facial expression and mask presence. The latencies and amplitudes of the five components (P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3) were analyzed at each site. For the behavioral measures, repeated two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that accuracy was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and the presence of a mask (p < 0.01), with an interaction effect (p < 0.001). Response time was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and interaction (p < 0.01), however, it was not affected by the presence of a mask (p > 0.05). For evoked potentials, there were no significant differences in latency and amplitude for each site and component by type of facial expression (p > 0.05, one-way ANOVA). Nevertheless, there were significant differences in latency and amplitude for many sites and components with and without masks (p < 0.05, paired t-test). In addition, repeated two-way ANOVA revealed an interaction (p < 0.05) between N1 latency at F3, T3, C3, and Pz. In total, all these results suggest that the presence of a mask affects cognitive processing, and the presence of a mask for the type of facial expression affects central resources, both from a behavioral psychological and electrophysiological point of view.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference\",\"volume\":\"2024 \",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC53108.2024.10782072\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC53108.2024.10782072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

面部表情识别涉及视觉加工、特征提取、情绪加工和认知整合等多个方面,目前关于面部表情识别机制的生理证据较少。因此,本研究旨在利用诱发电位深入研究面部表情识别的大脑机制,并了解面具如何影响这些过程。我们记录了12名受试者对面部表情刺激的行为心理和电生理反应:行为测量(准确性和反应时间)和19个部位的诱发电位,这些诱发电位与面部表情类型和面具的存在相对应。在每个位点分析P1、N1、P2、N2和P3五组分的潜伏期和振幅。对于行为测量,重复双向方差分析(ANOVA)表明,准确性受到面部表情类型(p < 0.001)和面具的存在(p < 0.01)的显著影响,并存在交互效应(p < 0.001)。反应时间受面部表情类型(p < 0.001)和交互作用(p < 0.01)的显著影响,但不受面具存在的影响(p < 0.05)。对于诱发电位,不同面部表情类型的各部位和成分的潜伏期和振幅无显著差异(p < 0.05,单因素方差分析)。然而,许多部位和成分的潜伏期和振幅有显著差异(p < 0.05,配对t检验)。此外,重复双向方差分析显示,N1潜伏期在F3、T3、C3和Pz之间存在相互作用(p < 0.05)。总之,从行为心理学和电生理学的角度来看,所有这些结果都表明,面具的存在会影响认知加工,而面部表情类型的面具的存在会影响中枢资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect Investigation of Mask on Facial Expression Recognition Using Cerebral Evoked Potentials.

There is little physiological evidence on mechanisms of facial expression recognition, which involves visual processing, feature extraction, emotion-processing, and cognitive integration. Therefore, this study aims to delve into the cerebral mechanisms underlying facial expression recognition using evoked potentials and understand how face masks affect these processes. We recorded the behavioral psychological and electrophysiological responses to facial expression stimuli: behavioral measures (accuracy and response time) and evoked potentials at 19 sites, which were measured in 12 subjects, corresponding to the type of facial expression and mask presence. The latencies and amplitudes of the five components (P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3) were analyzed at each site. For the behavioral measures, repeated two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that accuracy was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and the presence of a mask (p < 0.01), with an interaction effect (p < 0.001). Response time was significantly affected by the type of facial expression (p < 0.001) and interaction (p < 0.01), however, it was not affected by the presence of a mask (p > 0.05). For evoked potentials, there were no significant differences in latency and amplitude for each site and component by type of facial expression (p > 0.05, one-way ANOVA). Nevertheless, there were significant differences in latency and amplitude for many sites and components with and without masks (p < 0.05, paired t-test). In addition, repeated two-way ANOVA revealed an interaction (p < 0.05) between N1 latency at F3, T3, C3, and Pz. In total, all these results suggest that the presence of a mask affects cognitive processing, and the presence of a mask for the type of facial expression affects central resources, both from a behavioral psychological and electrophysiological point of view.

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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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