Department of Psychology, Long Island University, 1 University Plaza, Brooklyn, NY 11201, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, 21 Bloomingdale Road, White Plains, NY 10605, USA.
Unit of Psychiatry, Department of Neuroscience, University of Parma, c/o Ospedale Maggiore, pad. 21 Braga, viale Gramsci 14, 43126 Parma, Italy.
Psychiatry Res. 2017 Sep;255:347-354. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.05.042. Epub 2017 May 30.
The impact of borderline personality pathology on facial emotion recognition has been in dispute; with impaired, comparable, and enhanced accuracy found in high borderline personality groups. Discrepancies are likely driven by variations in facial emotion recognition tasks across studies (stimuli type/intensity) and heterogeneity in borderline personality pathology. This study evaluates facial emotion recognition for neutral and negative emotions (fear/sadness/disgust/anger) presented at varying intensities. Effortful control was evaluated as a moderator of facial emotion recognition in borderline personality. Non-clinical multicultural undergraduates (n = 132) completed a morphed facial emotion recognition task of neutral and negative emotional expressions across different intensities (100% Neutral; 25%/50%/75% Emotion) and self-reported borderline personality features and effortful control. Greater borderline personality features related to decreased accuracy in detecting neutral faces, but increased accuracy in detecting negative emotion faces, particularly at low-intensity thresholds. This pattern was moderated by effortful control; for individuals with low but not high effortful control, greater borderline personality features related to misattributions of emotion to neutral expressions, and enhanced detection of low-intensity emotional expressions. Individuals with high borderline personality features may therefore exhibit a bias toward detecting negative emotions that are not or barely present; however, good self-regulatory skills may protect against this potential social-cognitive vulnerability.
边缘型人格病理学对面部情绪识别的影响一直存在争议；在高边缘型人格群体中发现了受损、可比和增强的准确性。差异可能是由研究中面部情绪识别任务的变化（刺激类型/强度）以及边缘型人格病理学的异质性驱动的。本研究评估了在不同强度下呈现的中性和负性情绪（恐惧/悲伤/厌恶/愤怒）的面部情绪识别。努力控制被评估为边缘型人格面部情绪识别的调节剂。非临床多元文化大学生（n = 132）完成了中性和负性情绪表情的不同强度（100%中性；25%/50%/75%情绪）和自我报告的边缘型人格特征和努力控制的变形面部情绪识别任务。更大的边缘型人格特征与检测中性面孔的准确性降低有关，但与检测负性情绪面孔的准确性增加有关，尤其是在低强度阈值下。这种模式受到努力控制的调节；对于努力控制程度较低但不高的个体，更大的边缘型人格特征与对中性表情的情绪归因错误以及对低强度情绪表达的增强检测有关。因此，具有高边缘型人格特征的个体可能表现出对不存在或几乎不存在的负性情绪的检测偏向；然而，良好的自我调节技能可能会防止这种潜在的社会认知脆弱性。
