Department of Cognitive Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition (LIBC), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Sci Rep. 2024 Aug 21;14(1):19455. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-70299-5.
While alterations in both physiological responses to others' emotions as well as interoceptive abilities have been identified in autism, their relevance in altered emotion recognition is largely unknown. We here examined the role of interoceptive ability, facial mimicry, and autistic traits in facial emotion processing in non-autistic individuals. In an online Experiment 1, participants (N = 99) performed a facial emotion recognition task, including ratings of perceived emotional intensity and confidence in emotion recognition, and reported on trait interoceptive accuracy, interoceptive sensibility and autistic traits. In a follow-up lab Experiment 2 involving 100 participants, we replicated the online experiment and additionally investigated the relationship between facial mimicry (measured through electromyography), cardiac interoceptive accuracy (evaluated using a heartbeat discrimination task), and autistic traits in relation to emotion processing. Across experiments, neither interoception measures nor facial mimicry accounted for a reduced recognition of specific expressions with higher autistic traits. Higher trait interoceptive accuracy was rather associated with more confidence in correct recognition of some expressions, as well as with higher ratings of their perceived emotional intensity. Exploratory analyses indicated that those higher intensity ratings might result from a stronger integration of instant facial muscle activations, which seem to be less integrated in intensity ratings with higher autistic traits. Future studies should test whether facial muscle activity, and physiological signals in general, are correspondingly less predictive of perceiving emotionality in others in individuals on the autism spectrum, and whether training interoceptive abilities might facilitate the interpretation of emotional expressions.
虽然自闭症患者的情绪识别能力和同理心能力都发生了变化,但它们在情绪识别中的相关性在很大程度上尚不清楚。我们在此研究了非自闭症个体在面部情绪处理中同理心能力、面部模仿和自闭症特征的作用。在一项在线实验 1 中,参与者(N=99)进行了面部情绪识别任务,包括对感知情绪强度的评价和对情绪识别的信心,并报告了特质内感准确性、内感敏感性和自闭症特征。在后续的实验室实验 2 中,有 100 名参与者参与了实验,我们复制了在线实验,并进一步研究了面部模仿(通过肌电图测量)、心脏内感准确性(通过心跳辨别任务评估)与情绪处理之间的关系,以及与自闭症特征的关系。在两个实验中,内感测量或面部模仿都不能解释自闭症特征较高的个体对面部表情识别的减少。较高的特质内感准确性与对某些表情的正确识别的信心更高有关,也与对其感知情绪强度的评分更高有关。探索性分析表明,这些更高的强度评分可能是由于即时面部肌肉活动的更强整合,而在自闭症特征较高的强度评分中,这些活动的整合似乎较少。未来的研究应该测试一般来说,面部肌肉活动和生理信号是否相应地更难以预测自闭症谱系个体对他人情绪的感知,以及内感能力训练是否可以促进对情绪表达的解释。