92 Views

Cognitive Science/ Cognitive Processes

Examining Facial Emotion Recognition Deficits, Error Patterns, and Eye-Gaze Patterns in Children with Callous-Unemotional Traits Using Dynamic Stimuli

(PS10-D89) Examining Facial Emotion Recognition Deficits, Error Patterns, and Eye-gaze Patterns in Children with Callous-unemotional Traits Using Dynamic Stimuli

Saturday, November 19, 2022

3:00 PM – 4:00 PM EST

Location: Westside Ballroom, 5th Floor

Author(s)

AS

Armandeep Singh, None

Undergraduate Researcher
The University of Alabama
Brentwood, Tennessee

Co-Author(s)

Rebecca Revilla, B.A.

Doctoral Student
The University of Alabama
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
BW

Bradley A. White, Ph.D.

Associate Professor
The University of Alabama
Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Deficits in facial emotion recognition (FER) of distress emotions, such as fear, are prevalent in children with callous-unemotional (CU) traits and may be implicated in the lack of empathy and increased antisocial behavior observed in the CU population (Blair, 2005; White et al., 2016) Eye-tracking technology can be used to further understand how children process facial emotions by examining which areas of the face children attend to while identifying facial emotions. Visual attention to the eyes (eye gaze) may increase FER accuracy for negative emotions, though it is unclear if visual attention patterns differ based on the type of emotion recognitions errors children make (Demetriou and Fanti, 2021). The present study examines differences in children’s visual attention to eye versus mouth regions of emotional face stimuli and explores whether these differences correlate with error patterns in fear recognition. Based on existing literature, we predicted children with CU traits would be less accurate recognizing a distress expression (fear) than a non-distress expression (happy), while also exploring FER error patterns. Eye gaze data is currently being analyzed and will be discussed. We also predicted that eye gaze would improve fear FER. A sample of children with elevated CU traits on the Antisocial Process Screening Device (N = 26, M = 8.57 years) completed a computerized FER task displaying dynamic face stimuli measuring accurate FER while visual attention was measured using a Tobii Pro eye tracker. A one-way ANOVA was conducted using R Studio to examine differences in FER between fear and happy expressions. Participants were less accurate in fear FER (M = 1.81, 95% CI = [1.68, 1.94]) than happy FER (M =4.81, 95% CI = [4.68, 4.94], F(1, 518) = 1043.5, p < 0.001). A second one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine error patterns for fear. There were significant differences in participants’ responses (F(5, 150) = 13.702, p < 0.001). Post-hoc comparisons with a Bonferroni adjustment showed that participants incorrectly recognized fear as disgust (M = 1.885, 95% CI = [1.46, 2.31]) as often as they correctly recognized it as fear (M = 1.808, 95% CI = [1.38, 2.23]). Fear and disgust responses were chosen most frequently, followed by sadness and anger. The difference in fear versus happy FER is consistent with previous research showing fear FER deficits in children with CU traits. Error patterns of fear indicate that children with CU traits may be most likely to incorrectly recognize fear as disgust. We are currently analyzing the eye tracking data to determine how visual attention relates to FER accuracy and error patterns. This study helps inform neurocognitive deficits that may in turn serve as key intervention targets in high-CU children.