Are max-specified infant facial expressions during face-to-face interaction consistent with differential emotions theory?

Matias, Reinaldo; Cohn, Jeffrey F.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.3.524

Cited by 81 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the whole, the data are consistent with the infant expression literature in showing that sad expressions and anger/sad blends co-occur to some degree with anger, weakly supporting DST (Camras, 1992;Matias & Cohen, 1993 expressions when a frustration is introduced, as might be expected of loosely differentiated negative expressions. Because only 3% of the negative expressions in the present experiments were sadness alone, sadness was not a significant part of the frustration response, a finding that replicates past work on emotional responses to extinction Sullivan et al, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contextual determinants of anger and other negative expressions in young infants.

Sullivan¹,

Lewis²

2003

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments examined how different frustration contexts affect the instrumental and emotional responses of 4-to 5-month-old infants. Three different frustrating contexts were investigated: loss of stimulation (extinction), reduction in contingent stimulation (partial reinforcement), and loss of stimulus control (noncontingency). In both experiments, changes in arm activity and facial expressions of anger and sadness coded according to the Maximally Discriminative Facial Movement Coding System (MAX) were the measures of frustration. Both experiments showed that (a) arm responses increased when the contingent stimulus was lost or reduced but decreased when control of the stimulus was lost under noncontingency, (b) MAX-coded anger, but not MAX-coded sad or blends of anger and sad, was associated with frustration, and (c) the pattern of anger and arm responses varied with the frustration context. When contingent stimulation was lost or reduced, both anger and arm responses increased, but when expected control was lost under noncontingency, arm responses decreased while anger increased.Infants' responses to distinctive eliciting contexts have a long history in the assessment of emotions during the 1st year of life. For example, tickling, having the infant taste lemon juice in contrast to sweet and bitter solutions, sudden violations such as that produced by a jack-inthe-box, the entry of a masked stranger, arm restraint, or removal of a teething biscuit have all been used to elicit facial expressions in young infants (Bendersky, Sullivan, Alessandri, & Lewis, 1995;Braungart-Reiker & Stifter, 1996;Charlesworth, 1969;Fox & Davidson, 1986;Granchrow, Steiner, & Daher, 1983;Kochanska, Coy, Tjebkes, & Husarek, 1998;Rosenstein & Oster, 1988;Scarr & Salapatek, 1970;Skarkin, 1977;Sroufe & Wunsch, 1972;Steiner, 1979;Stenberg, Campos, & Emde, 1983). These situations represent only a sample of the various contexts that have been devised. Studying facial expressions and behavior in varied contexts (a) can demonstrate whether there are relatively unique sets of facial expressions for a given context and whether the same expression serves different functions across contexts and (b) allows some confidence about the "signal value" of infant facial expressions (Bennett, Bendersky, & Lewis, 2002;Lewis & Michalson, 1983). Examination of facial expressions across a variety of well-controlled and systematically varied contexts should also help to clarify issues related to infant facial expressions and their organization early in development.The literature on infant facial expression has many problems (Lewis & Michalson, 1983). First is the issue of emotional expression as an index of emotional state. Others are the relation between emotional expressions and experiences, the connection between emotional state and NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript experience, and finally, the relation between specific elicitors and facial expressions. Differential emotions theory (DET; Izard & Ackerman, 2...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…In addition, we coded a wider range of emotion expressions during the frustration period. In addition to anger and sadness, we examined blends of anger and sadness because these commonly occur in situations in which discrete anger and sadness expressions are observed (Camras, 1992;Matias & Cohen, 1993). We also examined surprise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual determinants of anger and other negative expressions in young infants.

Sullivan¹,

Lewis²

2003

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the mixed results of prior studies using sour-tasting substances, we did not have a clear hypothesis regarding which expression would be most prevalent, although we did hypothesize that it would be an expression of negative valence (e.g., anger or disgust). To test for predicted specificity, we sought evidence for both intrasituational and intersituational specificity.Female infants have been shown to exhibit greater negative affect and interest expressions in interactions with their mothers (Malatesta, Culver, Rich-Tesman, & Shepard, 1989;Malatesta & Haviland, 1982;Matias & Cohn, 1993;Stoller & Field, 1982;Weinberg, Tronick, Cohn, & Olson, 1999). However, some studies have failed to find sex differences (Cohn & Tronick, 1983;Izard et al, 1995;Matias & Cohn, 1993;Mayes, Bornstein, Chawarska, Haynes, & Granger, 1996), whereas others have found sex differences to be mediated by parental affect during relational interactions (Carter, Mayes, & Pajer, 1990;Weinberg et al, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Facial Expressivity at 4 Months: A Context by Expression Analysis

Bennett

Bendersky²,

Lewis³

2002

Infancy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The specificity predicted by differential emotions theory (DET) for early facial expressions in response to 5 different eliciting situations was studied in a sample of 4-month-old infants (n = 150). Infants were videotaped during tickle, sour taste, jack-in-the-box, arm restraint, and maskedstranger situations and their expressions were coded second by second. Infants showed a variety of facial expressions in each situation; however, more infants exhibited positive (joy and surprise) than negative expressions (anger, disgust, fear, and sadness) across all situations except sour taste. Consistent with DET-predicted specificity, joy expressions were the most common in response to tickling, and were less common in response to other situations. Surprise expressions were the most common in response to the jack-in-the-box, as predicted, but also were the most common in response to the arm restraint and masked-stranger situations, indicating a lack of specificity. No evidence of predicted specificity was found for anger, disgust, fear, and sadness expressions. Evidence of individual differences in expressivity within situations, as well as stability in the pattern across situations, underscores the need to examine both child and contextual factors in studying emotional development. The results provide little support for the DET postulate of situational specificity and suggest that a synthesis of differential emotions and dynamic systems theories of emotional expression should be considered.Researchers use many tasks to elicit facial expressions in infants, including tickling, arm restraint, aversive-tasting substances, and presentation of a jack-in-the-box or a masked stranger (Bendersky, Alessandri, & Lewis, 1996;Braungart-Rieker & Stifter, 1996;Fox & Davidson, 1986;Ganchrow, Steiner, & Daher, 1983;Kochanska, Coy, Tjebkes, & Husarek, 1998;Rosenstein & Oster, 1988;Scarr & Salapatek, 1970;Skarin, 1977;Sroufe & Wunsch, 1972;Steiner, 1979). Infants' responses to these distinct contexts serve as a critical source of evidence for the presence of emotions during the first few months of life. Little research, however, has systematically documented the variety of facial expressions young infants exhibit in response to such a diverse set of situations.Studying facial expressivity in response to varied stimuli may have important implications for emotion theory. Are there relatively unique sets of facial expressions for a given context or situation, or are the same expressions present across situations but perhaps serving different functions (e.g., smiling can be exhibited in the service of pleasure, embarrassment, or fear and submission; Lewis & Michalson, 1983)? To strengthen inferences about the meaning of particular facial expressions at early ages, it is crucial to observe the full range of contexts in which infants produce the expressions (Camras, Malatesta, & Izard, 1991 addition, the study of emotional expressions without attention to context may result in misinterpreting the meaning or function of such expression...

show abstract

“…The three negative expressions-anger, sadness, and fear-were combined into a single negative expression score. Fear and sadness occur with relatively low frequency in this procedure, and several researchers have questioned whether discrete negative expressions at this age correspond to well-differentiated states (Lewis & Michalson, 1983;Matias & Cohn, 1993). Table 2 presents the neonatal medical and environmental risk scores, the maternal contingent responsivity score, the concurrent maternal sensitivity scores, and the duration of maternal vocalizations during the en face and reengagement phases for the cocaine-exposed and unexposed groups.…”

Section: Dependent Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arousal modulation in cocaine-exposed infants.

Bendersky¹,

Lewis²

1998

Developmental Psychology

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to modulate arousal is a critical skill with wide-ranging implications for development. In this study, the authors examined arousal regulation as a function of levels of prenatal cocaine exposure in 107 infants at 4 months of age using a "still-face" procedure. Facial expressions were coded. A greater percentage of heavily cocaine-exposed infants, compared with those who were unexposed to cocaine, showed less enjoyment during en face play with their mothers and continued to show negative expressions during the resumption of play following a period when the interaction was interrupted. This finding was independent of other substance exposure, neonatal medical condition, environmental risk, maternal contingent responsivity, and concurrent maternal sensitivity and vocalizations.

show abstract

Are max-specified infant facial expressions during face-to-face interaction consistent with differential emotions theory?

Cited by 81 publications

References 38 publications

Contextual determinants of anger and other negative expressions in young infants.

Contextual determinants of anger and other negative expressions in young infants.

Facial Expressivity at 4 Months: A Context by Expression Analysis

Arousal modulation in cocaine-exposed infants.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About