Brain Effective Connectivity Analysis from EEG for Positive and Negative Emotion

  • Jianhai Zhang
  • Shaokai Zhao
  • Wenhao Huang
  • Sanqing Hu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10637)


Recently, there have been increasing evidence which supports that multiple brain regions are involved in emotion processing. Therefore, research on emotion from the perspective of brain network is becoming popular. In this study, based on the Granger causal analysis method, we constructed brain effective connectivity network from DEAP emotional EEG data to investigate how emotion affects the patterns of effective connectivity. According to our results, prefrontal region plays the most important role in emotion processing with interactions to almost all other regions. More interactions are found under negative emotion than positive one. Parietal region in charge of human’s alert mechanism is more active under negative emotions. These results are consistent with the previous findings obtained in neuroscience, which illustrate the effectiveness of our methods. Furthermore, the brain effective connectivity network shows significant differences to different emotional states, so it can be used to recognize different emotional states with EEG.


Emotion processing Granger causality Brain effective network EEG 



This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61100102 and Grant 61473110 and Grant 61633010, in part by the International Science and Technology Cooperation Program of China under Grant 2014DFG12570.


  1. 1.
    Bono, V., Biswas, D., Das, S., et al.: Classifying human emotional states using wireless EEG based ERP and functional connectivity measures. In: IEEE International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shahabi, H., Moghimi, S.: Toward automatic detection of brain responses to emotional music through analysis of EEG effective connectivity. Comput. Hum. Behav. 58, 231–239 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hamann, S.: Mapping discrete and dimensional emotions onto the brain: controversies and consensus. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 458–466 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tettamanti, M., Rognoni, E., Cafiero, R., et al.: Distinct pathways of neural coupling for different basic emotions. NeuroImage 59, 1804–1817 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lindquist, K., Wager, T., Kober, H., et al.: The brain basis of emotion: a meta-analytic review. Behav. Brain Sci. 35(3), 121–143 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koelstra, S., Muhl, C., Soleymani, M., et al.: DEAP: a database for emotion analysis. Using Physiol. Signals 3, 18–31 (2016). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seth, A.K.: A MATLAB toolbox for Granger causal connectivity analysis. J. Neurosci. Methods 186, 262–273 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    James, D.H.: Time Series Analysis. Princeton University Press (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P., et al.: Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root ☆: how sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? J. Pap. 54(1–3), 159–178 (1990)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akaike, H.: A new loot at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. J. Autom. Control 19(6), 716–723 (1974)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Durbin, J., Watson, G.S.: Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression. I. In: Kotz, S., Johnson, N.L. (eds.) Breakthroughs in Statistics. Springer Series in Statistics (Perspectives in Statistics), pp. 237–259. Springer, New York (1992). doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ding, M., Bressler, S.L., Yang, W., et al.: Short-window spectral analysis of cortical event-related potentials by adaptive multivariate autoregressive modeling: data preprocessing, model validation, and variability assessment. J. Biol. Cybern. 83(1), 35–45 (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, N., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Tang, Y., Wang, J.: Gamma oscillation in brain connectivity in emotion recognition by Granger causality. In.: International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, vol. 2, pp. 762–766. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Friedman, D., Shapira, S., Jacobson, L., Gruberger, M.: A data-driven validation of frontal EEG asymmetry using a consumer device. In: International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, pp. 930–937. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, M.K., Kim, M., Oh, E., Kim, S.P.: A review on the computational methods for emotional state estimation from the human EEG. J. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2013, 13 p. (2013). Article ID 573734. doi: 10.1155/2013/573734
  16. 16.
    Heller, W.: Neuropsychological mechanisms of individual differences in emotion, personality, and arousal. J. Neuropsychol. 7, 476–489 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin, Y.P., Wang, C.H., Jung, T.P., Wu, T.L., Jeng, S.K., Duann, J.R., et al.: EEG-based emotion recognition in music listening. J. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57, 1798–1806 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jianhai Zhang
    • 1
  • Shaokai Zhao
    • 1
  • Wenhao Huang
    • 1
  • Sanqing Hu
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Computer ScienceHangzhou Dianzi UniversityHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations