Palumbo Letizia, Burnett Hollie G, Jellema Tjeerd
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, L69 7ZA Liverpool, UK.
Department of Clinical Psychology, Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, EH8 9AG Edinburgh, UK.
Mol Autism. 2015 Aug 15;6:47. doi: 10.1186/s13229-015-0039-7. eCollection 2015.
Understanding and anticipating others' mental or emotional states relies on the processing of social cues, such as dynamic facial expressions. Individuals with high-functioning autism (HFA) may process these cues differently from individuals with typical development (TD) and purportedly use a 'mechanistic' rather than a 'mentalistic' approach, involving rule- and contingency-based interpretations of the stimuli. The study primarily aimed at examining whether the judgments of facial expressions made by individuals with TD and HFA would be similarly affected by the immediately preceding dynamic perceptual history of that face. A second aim was to explore possible differences in the mechanisms underpinning the perceptual judgments in the two groups.
Twenty-two adults with HFA and with TD, matched for age, gender and IQ, were tested in three experiments in which dynamic, 'ecologically valid' offsets of happy and angry facial expressions were presented. Participants evaluated the expression depicted in the last frame of the video clip by using a 5-point scale ranging from slightly angry via neutral to slightly happy. Specific experimental manipulations prior to the final facial expression of the video clip allowed examining contributions of bottom-up mechanisms (sequential contrast/context effects and representational momentum) and a top-down mechanism (emotional anticipation) to distortions in the perception of the final expression.
In experiment 1, the two groups showed a very similar perceptual bias for the final expression of joy-to-neutral and anger-to-neutral videos (overshoot bias). In experiment 2, a change in the actor's identity during the clip removed the bias in the TD group, but not in the HFA group. In experiment 3, neutral-to-joy/anger-to-neutral sequences generated an undershoot bias (opposite to the overshoot) in the TD group, whereas no bias was observed in the HFA group.
We argue that in TD individuals the perceptual judgments of other's facial expressions were underpinned by an automatic emotional anticipation mechanism. In contrast, HFA individuals were primarily influenced by visual features, most notably the contrast between the start and end expressions, or pattern extrapolation. We critically discuss the proposition that automatic emotional anticipation may be induced by motor simulation of the perceived dynamic facial expressions and discuss its implications for autism.
理解和预测他人的心理或情绪状态依赖于对社会线索的处理,比如动态面部表情。高功能自闭症(HFA)患者处理这些线索的方式可能与发育正常(TD)的个体不同,据称他们使用的是一种“机械性”而非“心理性”的方法,涉及基于规则和偶然性对刺激进行解释。该研究主要旨在检验TD个体和HFA个体对面部表情的判断是否会受到该面部即时之前的动态感知历史的类似影响。第二个目的是探索两组在支撑感知判断的机制方面可能存在的差异。
22名年龄、性别和智商相匹配的HFA成年患者和TD成年患者参与了三项实验,实验中呈现了快乐和愤怒面部表情的动态、“生态有效”的偏移。参与者使用从微怒到中性再到微喜的5分量表对视频片段最后一帧中描绘的表情进行评估。在视频片段最后面部表情出现之前进行的特定实验操作,能够检验自下而上的机制(顺序对比/背景效应和表征动量)以及自上而下的机制(情绪预期)对最终表情感知扭曲的影响。
在实验1中,两组在从快乐到中性以及从愤怒到中性的视频的最终表情上表现出非常相似的感知偏差(过冲偏差)。在实验2中,片段中演员身份的变化消除了TD组的偏差,但HFA组没有。在实验3中,从中性到快乐/从愤怒到中性的序列在TD组中产生了下冲偏差(与过冲相反),而HFA组未观察到偏差。
我们认为,对于TD个体,对他人面部表情的感知判断是由自动情绪预期机制支撑。相比之下,HFA个体主要受视觉特征影响,最显著的是起始表情和结束表情之间的对比,或模式外推。我们批判性地讨论了自动情绪预期可能由对感知到的动态面部表情的运动模拟所诱发这一观点,并讨论了其对自闭症的影响。