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

Abstract

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...

The relation of ANS and HPA activation to infant anger and sadness response to goal blockage

“…Following Darwin, we have argued that anger/approach is a more optimal response to goal blockage than sadness/ withdrawal. In support of this view, we have found: (a) anger is associated with perceived control and increased instrumental activity to overcome the obstacle, whereas sadness is not Lewis & Ramsay, 2005;Sullivan & Lewis, 2003); anger is associated with increased positive emotion once the obstacle has been removed, whereas sadness is not ; and (c) anger is not associated with increases in stress (as indicated by increases in cortisol), whereas sadness is associated with stress (Lewis & Ramsay, 2005). If we are correct, then the present results suggest that the pattern associated with anger, high heart rate-low cortisol, is the more optimal physiological response to blockage of a goal, whereas the pattern associated with sadness, low heart rate-high cortisol, is a less optimal physiological response to goal blockage.…”

“…When this condition is introduced, infants show increased anger, but not increased arm-pulling (Sullivan & Lewis, 2003). That what was a response-contingent event now occurs independent of arm-pulling serves to inform infants that they are no longer in control.…”

“…Consistent with Henry's view, we expected anger to be associated with increased heart rate, but not cortisol and sadness to be associated with increased cortisol, but not heart rate. Four months was chosen as the sample age since in past work it has proved a good time to examine individual differences in infant anger and sadness responses to goal blockage Lewis & Ramsay, 2005;Sullivan & Lewis, 2003).…”

Preference for consonant music over dissonant music by an infant chimpanzee

“…A pair of loudspeakers were located one on each side of the bed (behind the curtains). A woolen string was attached to the subject's right arm, and the subject's pulling response was recorded by means of a PC followed the contingency procedure previously adopted in human infant studies (e.g., DeCasper and Fifer 1980;Sullivan and Lewis 2003). If the subject pulled the string that was attached to her right arm, it activated a digital switch connected to a PC; thereafter, CV or DV music was presented through the loudspeakers for 7 s. If the subject pulled the string again within an interval (inter-pulling interval: IPI) of less than 7 s, the same music was presented continuously for up to 120 s. An IPI of between 7 and 14 s also resulted in the continuation of the same music, but following a pause of 0 to 7 s. An IPI of more than 14 s or the presentation of a particular version of music for more than 120 s terminated that particular trial and resulted in the music being changed from CV to DV or vice versa.…”

Constructing an understanding of mind: The development of children's social understanding within social interaction

“…Beginning as early as age three or four months, infants discriminate between the facial and vocal expressions of several basic emotions. They respond to them, as well as to different environmental conditions, in ways that suggest they can meaningfully decode external emotion signals and respond sensibly to their own internal signals (Haviland & Lelwica 1987;Izard et al 1995;Sullivan & Lewis 2003;Sullivan et al 1992;Weinberg & Tronick 1994). If one accepts these findings as evidence that feelings are natural elements of mind, two things follow.…”