The time course of face processing: startle eyeblink response modulation by face gender and expression

Duval, Elizabeth R.; Lovelace, Christopher T.; Aarant, Justin; Filion, Diane L.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.08.006

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Each trial began with a 2,000-ms fixation cross followed by presentation of an affective face for 17 ms, immediately replaced by a neutral face mask for 4,983 ms, which was a mirror image of the same model depicted in the target image. The duration of the mask was longer than in some prior studies using masked faces (Kim et al, 2010), but was consistent with studies using startle eyeblink to assess perception of unmasked affective scenes (Bradley et al, 2006) and faces (Anokhin & Golosheykin, 2010;Duval, Lovelace et al, 2013). The startle-eliciting stimulus was presented 300 ms, 800 ms, or 3,500 ms after the onset of the mask.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 76%

“…We predicted that, at the 800-ms lead interval, attention that had been allocated to the faces at 300 ms would be disengaged, resulting in a lack of PPI (consistent with prior research using nonmasked affective scenes; Bradley et al, 2006). We predicted that, during the late time window (3,500ms lead interval), the gender of the face would play a role in modulating startle responses, such that male faces would be perceived as more negative than female faces and would elicit more robust AMS, in line with previous literature (Duval, Lovelace et al, 2013;Hess et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flashing a smile: Startle eyeblink modulation by masked affective faces

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affective faces are important stimuli with relevance to healthy and abnormal social and affective information processing. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of brief presentations of affective faces on attention and emotional state across the time course of stimulus processing, as indexed by startle eyeblink response modulation. Healthy adults were presented with happy, neutral, and disgusted male and female faces that were backward masked by neutral faces. Startle responses were elicited at 300, 800, and 3,500 ms following stimulus presentation to probe early and late startle eyeblink modulation, indicative of attention allocation and emotional state, respectively. Results revealed that, at 300 ms, both face expression and face gender modulated startle eyeblink response, suggesting that more attention was allocated to masked happy compared to disgusted female faces, and masked disgusted compared to neutral male faces. There were no effects of either face expression or face gender on startle modulation at 800 ms. At 3,500 ms, target face expression did not modulate startle, but male faces elicited larger startle responses than female faces, indicative of a more negative emotional state. These findings provide a systematic investigation of attention and emotion modulation by brief affective faces across the time course of stimulus processing.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Flashing a smile: Startle eyeblink modulation by masked affective faces

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Please note that a recent study (Duval, Lovelace, Aarant, & Filion, 2013) failed to replicate the effect reported by Hess and colleagues (2007). However, the authors themselves note that because of the small number of stimuli used in their study, the faces might not generalise to the broader expression by gender categories (cf.…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…However, the authors themselves note that because of the small number of stimuli used in their study, the faces might not generalise to the broader expression by gender categories (cf. Duval et al, 2013). Furthermore, calculations based on the results reported by Hess and colleagues, an α-value of .05, and power 1-β= .80 suggest that the study by Duval et al might be underpowered with n = 23 (calculation was done using G. Power 3.1.3; Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007).…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender of the expresser moderates the effect of emotional faces on the startle reflex

Paulus

Musiał

Renn

2014

Cognition and Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested that the impact of emotional expressions on the startle reflex is influenced by the intention communicated by the expression (e.g., the intention to attack). However, we propose that the meaning of an emotional expression is not only based on the intention, but is also influenced by characteristics of the expresser such as gender: since men are typically seen as more dominant than women, anger expressed by men should be perceived as particularly threatening, thus amplifying the startle response. We compared the influence of anger, fear and neutral expressions shown by men and women on the startle reaction. Startle reactions were measured using electromyography. As predicted, we found stronger startle reactions after the presentation of anger expressed by men compared to fearful and neutral expressions shown by men. For female expressers, the startle response was not affected by expression type.

show abstract

“…It was also chosen because this latency corresponds roughly to the time course of face processing as described in previous studies (with the N250 being the first electrophysiological index of recognizing familiar faces; e.g., Schweinberger et al, 2004). Moreover, to exclude the possibility that rapid processing of emotional cues (such as facial expressions) would confound startle responses both at long and short onset delays (Duval et al, 2013), special care was taken only to include stimulus materials as affectively neutral as possible (i.e., neutral facial expression, no hair or clothing, etc. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%