Generalized hostile interpretation bias regarding facial expressions: Characteristic of pathological aggressive behavior

Abstract

Individuals with aggression regulation disorders tend to attribute hostility to others in socially ambiguous situations. Previous research suggests that this "hostile attribution bias" is a powerful cause of aggression. Facial expressions form important cues in the appreciation of others' intentions. Furthermore, accurate processing of facial expressions is fundamental to normal socialization. However, research on interpretation biases in facial affect is limited. It is asserted that a hostile interpretation bias (HIB) is likely to be displayed by individuals with an antisocial (ASPD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) and probably also with an intermittent explosive disorder (IED). However, there is little knowledge to what extent this bias is displayed by each of these patient groups. The present study investigated whether a HIB regarding emotional facial expressions was displayed by forensic psychiatric outpatients (FPOs) and whether it was associated with ASPD and BPD in general or, more specifically, with a disposition to react with pathological aggression. Participants of five different groups were recruited: FPOs with ASPD, BPD, or IED, non-forensic patients with BPD (nFPOs-BPD), and healthy, non-aggressive controls (HCs). Results suggest that solely FPOs with ASPD, BPD, or IED exhibit a HIB regarding emotional facial expressions. Moreover, this bias was associated with type and severity of aggression, trait aggression, and cognitive distortions. The results suggest that a HIB regarding facial expressions is an important characteristic of pathological aggressive behavior. Interventions that modify the HIB might help to reduce the recurrence of aggression. Aggr. Behav. 43:386-397, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Examining the reactive proactive questionnaire in adults in forensic and non‐forensic settings: A variable‐ and person‐based approach

“…The age ranged from 18 to 63 years ( M = 28.52, SD = 10.82). Details with regard to the recruitment of participants from forensic settings are described elsewhere (Brugman et al, ; Cornet, van der Laan, Nijman, Tollenaar & de Kogel, ; Smeijers, Rinck, Bulten, van den Heuvel, & Verkes, submitted). All non‐forensic participants were recruited at Maastricht University using flyers, posters, and a student‐participation system.…”

From words to action: Implicit attention to antisocial semantic cues predicts aggression and amygdala reactivity to angry faces in healthy young women

“…In line with this formulation, direct electrophysiological recordings showed that quick amygdala responses to videos depicting interpersonal harm predict intentionality attribution (Hesse et al, 2016). Similarly, individuals with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD), who have a tendency to interpret ambiguous faces as hostile (Smeijers, Rinck, Bulten, van den Heuvel, & Verkes, 2017), were faster to direct their gaze toward the eyes of angry-looking faces as a function of amygdala activation (Bertsch et al, 2013). The present results conversely imply that the use of distraction strategies in the presence of threat or provocation might help in curbing aggressive impulses (Lievaart, Huijding, van der Veen, Hovens, & Franken, 2017;Vasquez et al, 2013).…”

“…Supporting this interpretation, persons with intermittent explosive disorder (IED) showed enhanced amygdala reactivity to angry faces during both implicit (Coccaro et al, 2007) and explicit emotion processing tasks (McCloskey et al, 2016). Similarly, individuals with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD), who have a tendency to interpret ambiguous faces as hostile (Smeijers, Rinck, Bulten, van den Heuvel, & Verkes, 2017), were faster to direct their gaze toward the eyes of angry-looking faces as a function of amygdala activation (Bertsch et al, 2013). Subjects who show stronger interference caused by antisocial cues might thus be more likely to ruminate on the opponent's anger displays and/or to perceive them as more intense.…”

Perceiving the evil eye: Investigating hostile interpretation of ambiguous facial emotional expression in violent and non-violent offenders

“…In addition, it may be argued that such ambiguous or neutral facial expressions may be more common in social interactions in daily life [ 11 ], making this research particularly relevant. To date, few studies have shown that the hostile interpretation bias in people with aggressive tendencies manifests itself indeed in the basic level of facial emotion perception [ 10 , 12 – 14 ]. For example, Schönenberg and Jusyte [ 10 ] found that violent offenders rated morphed ambiguous faces on an happy-angry or fearful-angry dimension as more angry than healthy volunteers, while no clear differences between groups were present on the more extreme exemplars (e.g., non-ambiguous) of these continua [ 10 ].…”

“…This biased perception appeared to be restricted only to emotional dimensions with a component of anger. However, in a recent study among forensic outpatients from Smeijers, Rinck, Bulten, Van den Heuvel and Verkes [ 12 ] a highly generalized hostile interpretation bias was manifested in perception of emotionally ambiguous faces with respect to multiple emotions (not only anger, but also disgust and fear). Moreover, this study showed that this bias appeared to be characteristic of pathological aggression, regardless of intelligence or a psychiatric diagnosis of antisocial or borderline personality disorder or intermittent explosive disorder.…”