دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی شماره 37767
عنوان فارسی مقاله

فعالیت EMG صورت پیشرفته در پاسخ به حالت پویای صورت

کد مقاله سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی ترجمه فارسی تعداد کلمات
37767 2008 5 صفحه PDF سفارش دهید محاسبه نشده
خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.
عنوان انگلیسی
Enhanced facial EMG activity in response to dynamic facial expressions
منبع

Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)

Journal : International Journal of Psychophysiology, Volume 70, Issue 1, October 2008, Pages 70–74

کلمات کلیدی
حالات پویای صورت احساسات - القای هیجانی - تشخیص احساسات - الکترومیوگرافی صورت - تقلید و صورت
پیش نمایش مقاله
پیش نمایش مقاله فعالیت EMG صورت پیشرفته در پاسخ به حالت پویای صورت

چکیده انگلیسی

Abstract The suggestion that dynamic facial expressions of emotion induce more evident facial mimicry than static ones remains controversial. We investigated this issue by recording EMG from the corrugator supercilii and zygomatic major. Dynamic and static facial expressions of anger and happiness were presented. Dynamic presentations of angry expressions induced stronger EMG activity from the corrugator supercilii than static presentations, while dynamic presentations of happy expressions induced stronger EMG activity from the zygomatic major compared to static presentations. These results indicate that dynamic facial expressions induce facial EMG activity interpretable as facial mimicry more evidently than static expressions.

مقدمه انگلیسی

1. Introduction Communication through facial expressions of emotion plays an important role in social coordination (Keltner and Kring, 1998). Throughout the evolutionary process, facial expressions have helped humans act collectively during times of danger and form close relationships with one another. Consistent with this idea, psychophysiological studies using facial electromyography (EMG) indicate that facial expressions elicit facial muscular activity congruent with the presented facial expressions. For example, Dimberg (1982) showed that mere photographic presentations of angry and happy facial expressions induced corrugator supercilii muscle activity (brow lowering actions, prototypical in angry facial expressions) and zygomatic major muscle activity (lip corner pulling actions, prototypical in happy facial expressions), respectively. This facial muscular activity can be interpreted as mimicking behavior or facial mimicry (Hess et al., 1999). Dimberg and Thunberg (1998) showed that facial EMG activity occurred rapidly after about 500 ms from the onset of facial pictures. Dimberg et al. (2000) reported that facial EMG activity occurred even without awareness of the specific facial expression. These data indicate that facial EMG activity interpretable as facial mimicry occurs rapidly and automatically in response to stimulus facial expressions. Dynamic facial expressions of emotion are ecologically valid and powerful media for emotional communication compared to static expressions. Several lines of psychological studies have investigated the effect of dynamic presentations of facial stimuli and reported a facilitative effect on facial processing. For example, the dynamic presentation of facial expressions has been shown to improve the emotional recognition of expressions (Frijda, 1953, Harwood et al., 1999 and Wehrle et al., 2000). Other research has found that the dynamic presentation of facial stimuli facilitated age (Berry, 1990) and identity recognition (Bruce and Valentine, 1988 and Lander et al., 1999) compared to static image presentations. Therefore, it appears reasonable to expect dynamic facial expressions to elicit facial mimicry more evidently than static ones. However, only a few studies have investigated this issue, and data are inconsistent. Weyers et al. (2006) presented dynamic and static facial expressions of anger and happiness using avatars, that is, computer-generated artificial faces. They took EMG recordings from the facial muscles of the corrugator supercilii and zygomatic major. Their results showed that dynamic presentations of happy expressions induced stronger EMG reactions for zygomatic major muscles compared to static presentations. This result is consistent with the idea that dynamic facial expressions induce more evident facial mimicry than static expressions. However, for angry facial expressions, they found no significant differences between dynamic and static presentations for corrugator supercilii muscle activity. Sato and Yoshikawa (2007a) investigated this issue utilizing a different methodology. They presented dynamic and static facial expressions of anger and happiness, using computer-morphing techniques and videos of real people. The participants' facial reactions were unobtrusively videotaped and blindly coded using an objective criterion (Ekman and Friesen, 1978). In the case of dynamic, but not static, presentations, brow lowering and lip corner pulling were evident for angry and happy expressions, respectively. These results indicate enhanced facial mimicry for dynamic facial expressions, common to both anger and happiness. The different results in these previous studies (Sato and Yoshikawa, 2007a and Weyers et al., 2006) may have been caused by differences in the stimuli that were presented. Whereas Weyers et al. (2006) utilized artificial avatars, Sato and Yoshikawa (2007a) applied representations of real peoples' faces. A recent neuroimaging study revealed that the activity of some social- and/or emotion-related brain regions, such as the amygdala, was lower when viewing avatars than when viewing real-person stimuli (Moser et al., 2007). The dynamic stimuli of real people may be more ecologically valid than dynamic avatars and hence, induce clearer facial mimicry. In this study, we utilized the stimuli of real people to test the hypothesis that enhanced facial EMG reactions could be induced by dynamic rather than static facial expressions of both negative and positive stimuli. We measured facial EMG reactions while participants passively viewed dynamic and static facial expressions. To present dynamic facial expressions, we used videos of real people's facial expressions, which had been used in a previous behavioral study and were shown to elicit automatic facial mimicry more evidently than static facial images (Sato and Yoshikawa, 2007a). We prepared facial expressions of anger and happiness to represent the positive and negative emotional valence. We used the apex images of the dynamic facial expressions under static conditions. After the facial EMG recordings, we presented the stimuli again, and required the participants to rate the experienced emotion and recognized emotion of the stimuli. We predicted that specific facial EMG reactions, interpretable as facial mimicry, would occur more evidently for dynamic rather than for static facial expressions of emotion.

نتیجه گیری انگلیسی

Results 3.1. Facial EMG For the corrugator supercilii muscle (Fig. 1, left), the ANOVA showed an interaction between presentation condition and expression, F(1, 28) = 9.55, P < 0.005. The main effect of emotion was also significant, F(1, 28) = 4.85, P < 0.05. Follow-up analyses of the interaction revealed that the simple main effect of presentation condition, indicating stronger corrugator supercilii activity for dynamic than for static presentations, was significant only for angry expressions, F(1, 56) = 6.36, P < 0.05. Mean (±SE) EMG change activity for corrugator supercilii (left) and zygomatic ... Fig. 1. Mean (± SE) EMG change activity for corrugator supercilii (left) and zygomatic major (right) muscles. Asterisks indicate the significant simple main effects of presentation condition, indicating higher activity for dynamic presentations than for static presentations. Figure options The one-sample t-tests revealed that significantly higher corrugator supercilii activity was observed for the dynamic angry expressions than for the baseline, t(28) = 2.00, P < 0.05, and significantly lower corrugator supercilii activity was seen for the dynamic happy expressions than for the baseline, t(28) = 3.08, P < 0.01. The activity for static angry expressions was not significant, t(28) = 0.74, n.s. For the zygomatic major muscle (Fig. 1, right), the interaction between presentation condition and expression was significant, F(1, 28) = 4.42, P < 0.05. The main effect of emotion was also significant, F(1, 28) = 10.96, P < 0.005. Follow-up analyses of the interaction revealed that the simple main effect of presentation condition, indicating stronger zygomatic major activity for dynamic than for static presentations, was significant only for happy expressions, F(1, 56) = 5.06, P < 0.05. Significantly higher zygomatic major activity was observed for the dynamic and static happy expressions than for the baseline, ts(28) > 2.53, Ps < 0 05. 3.2. Psychological ratings The results of the psychological ratings are shown in Table 1. For the valence of experienced emotion, the ANOVA showed that only the main effect of expression, indicating higher negative valence ratings for angry than for happy expressions, was significant, F(1, 28) = 146.40, P < 0.001. For the arousal of experienced emotion, only the interaction was significant, F(1, 28) = 8.36, P < 0.01. Follow-up analyses of the interaction indicated that the simple main effect of presentation condition, indicating higher arousal ratings for dynamic than for static expressions, was significant only for angry expressions, F(1, 56) = 6.55, P < 0.05. Table 1. Mean (with SE) ratings of valence and arousal for experienced and recognized emotions Measure Experienced emotion Recognized emotion Anger Happiness Anger Happiness Dynamic Static Dynamic Static Dynamic Static Dynamic Static Valence M 3.0 3.0 6.7 6.7 2.5 2.6 7.4 7.5 (SE) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) Arousal M 5.4 * 5.0 5.3 5.4 5.4 5.0 5.6 5.5 (SE) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) Note. Asterisk indicates the significant differences between dynamic and static presentations. *, P < 0.05. Table options For the valence of recognized emotion, only the main effect of expression, indicating higher negative valence ratings for angry than for happy expressions, was significant, F(1, 28) = 256.22, P < 0.001. For the arousal of recognized emotion, the main effect of presentation condition, indicating higher arousal ratings for dynamic than for static expressions, reached marginal significance, F(1, 28) = 3.24, P < 0.1. The main effect of expression, indicating higher arousal ratings for happy than for angry expressions also reached marginal significance, F(1, 28) = 3.05, P < 0.1.

خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.