Advertisement

Stimulus and observer characteristics jointly determine the relevance of threatening facial expressions and their interaction with attention

  • Michèle Chadwick
  • Hannah Metzler
  • Charles Tijus
  • Jorge L. Armony
  • Julie Grèzes
Original Paper

Abstract

Most emotional stimuli, including facial expressions, are judged not only by their intrinsic characteristics, but also by the context in which they appear. Gaze direction, for example, modifies the salience of explicitly presented facial displays. Yet, it is unknown whether this effect persists when facial displays are no longer task-relevant. Here, we first varied the salience of fearful, angry or neutral displays using gaze direction, while participants performed a gender (attended faces) or a scene discrimination task (unattended faces). Best performance occurred when faces were unattended and emotional expressions were highly salient (direct anger and averted fear), suggesting that these combinations are sufficiently important to capture attention and enhance visual processing. In a second experiment, we transiently changed participants’ individual characteristics by instructing them to hold either expansive or constrictive postures. Best performance occurred for direct anger and averted fear following expansive and constrictive postures, respectively, demonstrating that stimulus and observer characteristics jointly determine the attribution of relevance of threatening facial expressions and their interaction with attention.

Keywords

Emotion Gaze Threat Body posture Object-based attention 

Notes

Funding

This work was supported by the French National Research Agency under Grants ANR-11-EMCO-00902, ANR-10-LABX-0087 IEC, ANR-17-EURE-0017, ANR-10-IDEX-0001-02 PSL*, by INSERM and by a doctoral fellowship of the École des Neurosciences de Paris Ile-de-France and the Région Ile-de-France (DIM Cerveau et Pensée) to H.M..

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Adams, R. B., & Kleck, R. E. (2003). Perceived gaze direction and the processing of facial displays of emotion. Psychological Science, 14(6), 644–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, R. B. J., & Kleck, R. E. (2005). Effects of direct and averted gaze on the perception of facially communicated emotion. Emotion, 5(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adolphs, R., Gosselin, F., Buchanan, T. W., Tranel, D., Schyns, P. G., & Damasio, A. (2005). A mechanism for impaired fear recognition after amygdala damage. Nature, 433, 68–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aviezer, H., Hassin, R. R., Ryan, J., Grady, C., Susskind, J., Anderson, A., et al. (2008). Angry, disgusted, or afraid? Studies on the malleability of emotion perception. Psychological Science, 19(7), 724–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benuzzi, F., Pugnaghi, M., Meletti, S., Lui, F., Serafini, M., Baraldi, P., & Nichelli, P. (2007). Processing the socially relevant parts of faces. Brain Research Bulletin, 74(5), 344–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohns, V. K., & Wiltermuth, S. S. (2012). It hurts when I do this (or you do that): Posture and pain tolerance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 341–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power Posing: Brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363–1368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Yap, A. J. (2015). Review and summary of research on the embodied effects of expansive (vs. contractive) nonverbal displays. Psychological Science, 26(5), 657–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carretié, L. (2014). Exogenous (automatic) attention to emotional stimuli: A review. Cognitive Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(4), 1228–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cesario, J., & Johnson, D. J. (2017). Power poseur: Bodily expansiveness does not matter in dyadic interactions. Social Psychological and Personality Science.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617725153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cesario, J., & McDonald, M. M. (2013). Bodies in context: Power poses as a computation of action possibility. Social Cognition, 31, 260–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cristinzio, C., N’Diaye, K., Seeck, M., Vuilleumier, P., & Sander, D. (2010). Integration of gaze direction and facial expression in patients with unilateral amygdala damage. Brain, 133(1), 248–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuddy, A. J. C., Schultz, S. J., & Fosse, N. E. (2018). P-curving a more comprehensive body of research on postural feedback reveals clear evidential value for power-posing effects: Reply to Simmons and Simonsohn (2017). Psychological Science, 29(4), 656–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Waal, F. B. M. (2007). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Del Giudice, M. (2015). Gender differences in personality and social behavior. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) (pp. 750–756). New York: ElsevierCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neurosciences, 18, 193–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dickie, E. W., & Armony, J. L. (2008). Amygdala responses to unattended fearful faces: Interaction between sex and trait anxiety. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 162, 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dolan, R. J., & Vuilleumier, P. (2003). Amygdala automaticity in emotional processing. In P. ShinnickGallagher, A. Pitkanen, A. Shekhar & L. Cahill (Eds.), Amygdala in brain function: Bacic and clinical approaches (Vol. 985, pp. 348–355). New York: New York Acad Sciences.Google Scholar
  20. Eastwood, J. D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. M. (2003). Negative facial expression captures attention and disrupts performance. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(3), 352–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ewbank, M. P., Fox, E., & Calder, A. J. (2010). The interaction between gaze and facial expression in the amygdala and extended amygdala is modulated by anxiety. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4, 56.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Fantoni, C., & Gerbino, W. (2014). Body actions change the appearance of facial expressions. PLoS ONE, 9(9), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fecteau, J., & Munoz, D. (2006). Salience, relevance, and firing: A priority map for target selection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(8), 382–390.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.06.011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fenske, M. J., & Eastwood, J. D. (2003). Modulation of focused attention by faces expressing emotion: Evidence from flanker tasks. Emotion, 3(4), 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fischer, J., Fischer, P., Englich, B., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2011). Empower my decisions: The effects of power gestures on confirmatory information processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1146–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Garrison, K. E., Tang, D., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2016). Embodying power: A preregistered replication and extension of the power pose effect. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(7), 623–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Graham, R., & LaBar, K. S. (2007). Garner interference reveals dependencies between emotional expression and gaze in face perception. Emotion, 7(2), 296–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grant, E. C., & Mackintosh, J. H. (1963). A comparison of the social postures of some common laboratory rodents. Behaviour, 21, 246–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gronau, Q. F., van Erp, S., Heck, D. W., Cesario, J., Jonas, K., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2017). A bayesian model-averaged meta-analysis of the power pose effect with informed and default priors: The case of felt power. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 2, 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hagelin, J. C. (2002). The kinds of traits involved in male–male competition: A comparison of plumage, behavior, and body size in quail. Behavioral Ecology, 13(1), 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). Finding the face in the crowd: An anger superiority effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 917–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hartikainen, K. M., Ogawa, K. H., & Knight, R. T. (2000). Transient interference of right hemispheric function due to automatic emotional processing. Neuropsychologia, 38(12), 1576–1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hess, U., Adams, R. B. Jr, & Kleck, R. E. (2007). Looking at you or looking elsewhere: The influence of head orientation on the signal value of emotional facial expressions. Motivation and Emotion, 31(2), 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hortensius, R., van Honk, J., de Gelder, B., & Terburg, D. (2014). Trait dominance promotes reflexive staring at masked angry body postures. PLoS ONE, 9, e116232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Huang, L., Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Guillory, L. E. (2011). Powerful postures versus powerful roles: Which is the proximate correlate of thought and behavior? Psychological Science, 22(1), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kret, M. E., & De Gelder, B. (2012). A review on sex difference in procesing emotional signals. Neuropsychologia, 50(7), 1211–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Langner, O., Dotsch, R., Bijlstra, G., Wigboldus, D. H. J., Hawk, S. T., & van Knippenberg, A. (2010). Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database. Cognition & Emotion, 24(8), 1377–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46(8), 819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lazarus, R. S. (2006). Emotions and interpersonal relationships: Toward a person-centered conceptualization of emotions and coping. Journal of Personality, 74(1), 9–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maslow, A. H. (1943). Conflict, frustration, and the theory of threat. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38(1), 81–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mast, M. S., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Who is the boss and who is not? Accuracy of judging status. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mather, M., Clewett, D., Sakaki, M., & Harley, C. W. (2016). Norepinephrine ignites local hot spots of neuronal excitation: How arousal amplifies selectivity in perception and memory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15000667.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Mohanty, A., Gitelman, D. R., Small, D. M., & Mesulam, M. M. (2008). The spatial attention network interacts with limbic and monoaminergic systems to modulate motivation-induced attention shifts. Cerebral Cortex, 18(11), 2604–2613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mohanty, A., & Sussman, T. J. (2013). Top-down modulation of attention by emotion. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. N’Diaye, K., Sander, D., & Vuilleumier, P. (2009). Self-relevance processing in the human amygdala: Gaze direction, facial expression, and emotion intensity. Emotion, 9(6), 798–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Neath, K. N., & Itier, R. J. (2015). Fixation to features and neural processing of facial expressions in a gender discrimination task. Brain and Cognition, 99, 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ohman, A. (2002). Automaticity and the amygdala: Nonconscious responses to emotional faces. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 62–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ohman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108(3), 483–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 11087–11092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Panksepp, J., & Biven, L. (2012). The archaeology of mind: Neuroevolutionary origins of human emotions. New York: W.W Norton.Google Scholar
  52. Peck, C. J., & Salzman, C. D. (2014). The amygdala and basal forebrain as a pathway for motivationally guided attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(41), 13757–13767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Phelps, E. A., Ling, S., & Carrasco, M. (2006). Emotion facilitates perception and potentiates the perceptual benefits of attention. Psychological Science, 17(4), 292–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Proffitt, D. R. (2006). Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 110–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Proffitt, D. R., Stefanucci, J., & Banton, T. (2003). The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychological Science, 14(2), 106–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ranehill, E., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Leiberg, S., Sul, S., & Weber, R. A. (2015). Assessing the robustness of power posing: No effect on hormones and risk tolerance in a large sample of men and women. Psychological Science, 26, 653–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reddy, L., Wilken, P., & Koch, C. (2004). Face-gender discrimination is possible in the near-absence of attention. Journal of Vision, 4(2), 106–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Righart, R., & de Gelder, B. (2006). Context influences early perceptual analysis of faces—An electrophysiological study. Cerebral Cortex, 16(9), 1249–1257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ronay, R., Tybur, J. M., van Huijstee, D., & Morssinkhof, M. (2016). Embodied power, testosterone, and overconfidence as a causal pathway to risk-taking. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 2(1), 28–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rule, N. O., Adams, R. B., Ambady, N., & Freeman, J. B. (2012). Perceptions of dominance following glimpses of faces and bodies. Perception, 41, 687–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sander, D., Grafman, J., & Zalla, T. (2003). The human amygdala: an evolved system for relevance detection. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 14(4), 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sander, D., Grandjean, D., Kaiser, S., Wehrle, T., & Scherer, K. R. (2007). Interaction effects of perceived gaze direction and dynamic facial expression: Evidence for appraisal theories of emotion. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 470–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schnall, S., Zadra, J. R., & Proffitt, D. R. (2010). Direct evidence for the economy of action: Glucose and the perception of geographical slant. Perception, 39(4), 464–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schultheiss, O. C., & Hale, J. A. (2007). Implicit motives modulate attentional orienting to facial expressions of emotion. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smith, K. M., & Apicella, C. L. (2017). Winners, losers, and posers: The effect of power poses on testosterone and risk-taking following competition. Hormones and Behavior, 92, 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Speisman, J. C., Lazarus, R. S., Mordkoff, A., & Davison, L. (1964). Experimental reduction of stress based on ego-defense theory. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68(4), 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Terburg, D., Aarts, H., & van Honk, J. (2012). Memory and attention for social threat: Anxious hypercoding-avoidance and submissive gaze aversion. Emotion, 12, 666–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Terburg, D., Hooiveld, N., Aarts, H., Kenemans, J. L., & van Honk, J. (2011). Eye tracking unconscious face-to-face confrontations: Dominance motives prolong gaze to masked angry faces. Psychological Science, 22, 314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tiedens, L. Z., Unzueta, M. M., & Young, M. J. (2007). An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 402–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vigil, J. M. (2009). A socio-relational framework of sex differences in the expression of emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(5), 375–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vuilleumier, P., Armony, J. L., Driver, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2001). Effects of attention and emotion on face processing in the human brain: An event-related fMRI study. Neuron, 30, 829–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vuilleumier, P., & Schwartz, S. (2001). Beware and be aware: Capture of spatial attention by fear-related stimuli in neglect. Neuroreport, 12(6), 1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yap, A. J., Mason, M. F., & Ames, D. R. (2013). The powerful size others down: The link between power and estimates of others’ size. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 591–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zein, E., El, M., Wyart, V., & Grèzes, J. (2015). Anxiety dissociates the adaptive functions of sensory and motor response enhancements to social threats. eLife, 4, e10274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives, INSERM U960, Département d’études cognitives, Ecole Normale SupérieurePSL Research UniversityParisFrance
  2. 2.Laboratoire Cognitions Humaine et Artificielle, EA4004University Paris 8Saint-DenisFrance
  3. 3.Sorbonne Universités, UPMC University Paris 6ParisFrance
  4. 4.Department of Psychiatry & Douglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations