There is evidence that men and women display differences in both cognitive and affective functions. Recent studies have examined the processing of emotions in males and females. However, the findings are inconclusive, possibly the result of methodological differences. The aim of this study was to investigate the perception of emotional facial expressions in men and women. Video clips of neutral faces, gradually morphing into full-blown expressions were used. By doing this, we were able to examine both the accuracy and the sensitivity in labelling emotional facial expressions. Furthermore, all participants completed an anxiety and a depression rating scale. Research participants were 40 female students and 28 male students. Results revealed that men were less accurate, as well as less sensitive in labelling facial expressions. Thus, men show an overall worse performance compared to women on a task measuring the processing of emotional faces. This result is discussed in relation to recent findings.

No abstract

No abstract

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the intensity of emotion expression on children's developing ability to label emotion during a dynamic presentation of five facial expressions (anger, disgust, fear, happiness, and sadness). A computerized task (AFFECT-animated full facial expression comprehension test) was used to display facial emotion expressions as animations with four levels of intensity (35, 50, 75, and 100 percent). In this study, which employed a cross-sectional design, 240 participants from 4 to 18 years completed the AFFECT. Results indicated that recognition ability developed for each of the emotions, with the exception of disgust, over the age range tested. Girls were more accurate than boys, especially for anger and disgust expressions. Recognition accuracy was found to increase as a function of the intensity of emotional expressions.

Given the discrepancies between the information obtained while taking patient histories and test results, preoperative history-taking alone appears to be insufficient for identifying patients with metal sensitivity. Moreover, the increase in the percentage of patients who tested positive for metal sensitivity 1 year post-implantation suggests the possibility of prosthesis-induced sensitization. Therefore, objective determination of metal sensitivity at preoperative assessment should be considered in planning arthroplasty intervention, as it would help the surgeon in selecting the most appropriate prosthesis for the patient and could benefit implant performance.