动态高兴表情评价中的表征动量效应和参照依赖效应

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00029

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

已有的表情面孔研究大多使用静态面孔图片材料, 对动态表情研究相对不足。然而, 在生活中人们的表情往往是动态的。为了探究动态表情的情绪加工特点, 本研究通过3个包含了动态和静态高兴表情图片材料的实验, 考察了动态高兴表情的强度变化方向和总体平均表征对情绪三维度评价的影响。结果发现：总体平均表征越高的动态表情面孔会得到更高的唤醒度评分。以与动态表情最后一帧表情强度相同的静态表情为对比条件, 从强到弱变化的动态表情会获得更低的效价评分和更高的优势度评分, 而从弱到强变化的动态表情则获得更高的效价评分, 即出现了表征动量效应。相对于从弱到强, 从强到弱变化的动态表情所产生的知觉表征动量效应更大。此外, 知觉者会基于实验中所见过的表情图片形成内部参照标准, 进而影响当前表情图片的情绪评价, 内部参照标准越低, 目标表情图片所得情绪评分越高, 反之亦然, 表现出参照依赖效应。这些加工特征提示今后研究者采用表情材料进行研究时, 需要注意动静差异以及材料间的影响。

关键词: 动态表情, 情绪三维度, 表征动量, 参照依赖效应

Abstract:

The majority of current research on facial expression perception uses static face images, and there is comparatively little study on dynamic expression. However, facial expressions are highly dynamic phenomena capable of conveying complex psychological states: the motion inherent in dynamic stimuli is crucial for social perception and improves coherence in identifying facial affect. Previous studies have found that perceptual processing of dynamic expressions may involve a variety of mechanisms, and some of these mechanisms have inconsistent effects. Therefore, it is important to study dynamic expressions to understand the nuances of human communication and support the naturalistic assessment of affective disorders.

Three experiments involved 96 participants, which provided 94 valid samples. The experimental material came from the Chinese Affective Picture System (CASP). Dynamic expression sequences were created from the happy and neutral expressions of the same individual. In Experiment 1, the impact of direction change and the average summary representation were examined. Experiments 2a and 2b combined static expressions to systematically explored the representational momentum effect of dynamic happy expressions. As such, the average summary representation of dynamic expressions differed across the two experiments. Participants were asked to evaluate the valence, arousal, and dominance of the final emotion of dynamic expressions or static expressions on a seven-point scale. ANOVA, independent sample t-test, and one sample t-test were used to analyze the results.

In this study, it was found that when the faces changed from strong to weak (versus weak to strong), they were rated with lower valence scores and higher dominance scores. In addition, faces that went from strong to weak had lower valence scores and higher dominance scores than static faces with the same intensity of expression in the previous frame. Indicative of the the representational momentum effect, faces that went from weak to strong had higher valence scores. Furthermore, the dynamic happy expressions that moved from strong to weak had a larger impact on perceived representational momentum than the dynamic happy expressions that moved from weak to strong. The arousal ratings were higher for the dynamic happy expression with a higher average summary representation. Valence, arousal, and dominance scores for the same expression image differed across experimental designs and material groups, according to this study's thorough analysis of repeated stimulus conditions (such as static 50% smiling).

According to the results, representation momentum impact extends to the assessment of dynamic happy expression on valence and dominance dimensions. Additionally, when assessing a facial expression, the perceiver will make a relative assessment based on the internal reference standard: a lower the standard is associated with a higher the score, and vice versa. This finding is consistent with reference dependence effect on expression perception. These processing characteristics are used as a reminder to academics to consider the difference between dynamic and static expressions and to think about the impact of various materials when using facial expression data in the future.

Key words: dynamic expressions, three dimensions of emotions, the representational momentum effect, the reference dependence effect

中图分类号:

B842

田杨阳, 李东, 闫向博, 李曌, 崔倩, 蒋重清. (2024). 动态高兴表情评价中的表征动量效应和参照依赖效应. 心理学报, 56(1), 29-43.

TIAN Yangyang, LI Dong, YAN Xiangbo, LI Zhao, CUI Qian, JIANG Zhongqing. (2024). The representational momentum effect and the reference dependence effect on the evaluation of dynamic happy expressions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(1), 29-43.

图/表 12

参考文献 44

[1]	Ambadar Z., Schooler J. W., & Cohn J. F. (2005). Deciphering the enigmatic face: The importance of facial dynamics in interpreting subtle facial expressions. Psychological Science, 16(5), 403-410. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01548.x pmid: 15869701
[2]	Bradley M. M., & Lang P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49-59. doi: 10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 pmid: 7962581
[3]	Dong R. (2015). Facing orientation effect on representational momentum. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47(2), 190-202. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.00190
	[ 董蕊. (2015). 表征动量的朝向效应. 心理学报, 47(2), 190-202.]
[4]	Dozolme D., Prigent E., Yang Y. F., & Amorim M. A. (2018). The neuroelectric dynamics of the emotional anticipation of other people's pain. PloS One, 13(8), e0200535. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200535 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200535 URL
[5]	Dyjas O., Bausenhart K. M., & Ulrich R. (2012). Trial-by- trial updating of an internal reference in discrimination tasks: Evidence from effects of stimulus order and trial sequence. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, 74(8), 1819-1841.
[6]	Ekman P., Freisen W. V., & Ancoli S. (1980). Facial signs of emotional experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1125-1134. doi: 10.1037/h0077722 URL
[7]	Fang X., van Kleef G. A., & Sauter D. A. (2018). Person perception from changing emotional expressions: Primacy, recency, or averaging effect? Cognition and Emotion, 32(8), 1597-1610. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2018.1432476 URL
[8]	Finke R. A., & Freyd J. J. (1985). Transformations of visual memory induced by implied motions of pattern elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 11(4), 780-794.
[9]	Fiorentini C., & Viviani P. (2011). Is there a dynamic advantage for facial expressions? Journal of Vision, 11(3), 17. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.3.17
[10]	Freyd J. J. (1987). Dynamic mental representations. Psychological Review, 94(4), 427-438. pmid: 3317470
[11]	Goldman A. I. (2006). Simulating minds: The philosophy, psychology and neuroscience of mindreading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[12]	Gong X., Huang Y. X., Wang Y., & Luo Y. J. (2011). Revision of the Chinese facial affective picture system. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 25(1), 40-46.
	[ 龚栩, 黄宇霞, 王妍, 罗跃嘉. (2011). 中国面孔表情图片系统的修订. 中国心理卫生杂志, 25(1), 40-46.]
[13]	Hareli S., David S., & Hess U. (2016). The role of emotion transition for the perception of social dominance and affiliation. Cognition and Emotion, 30(7), 1260-1270. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2015.1056107 URL
[14]	Hoffmann H., Kessler H., Eppel T., Rukavina S., & Traue H. C. (2010). Expression intensity, gender and facial emotion recognition: Women recognize only subtle facial emotions better than men. Acta Psychologica, 135(3), 278-283. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.012 pmid: 20728864
[15]	Hubbard T. L. (2005). Representational momentum and related displacements in spatial memory: A review of the findings. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12(5), 822-851. doi: 10.3758/BF03196775 URL
[16]	Hudson M., & Jellema T. (2011). Resolving ambiguous behavioral intentions by means of involuntary prioritization of gaze processing. Emotion, 11(3), 681-686. doi: 10.1037/a0023264 pmid: 21534666
[17]	Jellema T., Pecchinenda A., Palumbo L., & Tan E. G. (2011). Biases in the perception and affective valence of neutral facial expressions induced by the immediate perceptual history. Visual Cognition, 19(5), 616-634. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2011.569775 URL
[18]	Kahneman D., & Tversky A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185 doi: 10.2307/1914185 URL
[19]	Korolkova O. A. (2018). The role of temporal inversion in the perception of realistic and morphed dynamic transitions between facial expressions. Vision Research, 143, 42-51. doi: S0042-6989(17)30250-X pmid: 29274357
[20]	Li H. J., Xu F. M., Xiang P., Kong S. X., & Meng Z. Z. (2013). Reference dependence based on prospect theory. Advances in Psychological Science, 21(2), 317-325. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.00317
	[ 李海军, 徐富明, 相鹏, 孔诗晓, 孟贞贞. (2013). 基于预期理论的参照依赖. 心理科学进展, 21(2), 317-325.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.00317
[21]	Liu J. C., Ran G. M., Zang Q., Hu Y. H., Yu X. H., Zhang Q. Z., & Yang D. (2021). The development of Chinese undergraduate dynamic affective facial database. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology. 27(3), 234-243.
	[ 刘俊材, 冉光明, 张琪, 胡艳红, 余晓惠, 张琼之, 杨蝶. (2021). 中国大学生动态情绪面孔库的建设. 应用心理学, 27(3), 234-243.]
[22]	Liu P., Lu Q., Zhang Z., Tang J., & Han B. (2021). Age- related differences in affective norms for Chinese words (AANC). Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 585666. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.585666 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.585666 URL
[23]	Liu T. S., Ma H., Huang Y. X., Luo Y. J., Yan J., & Liu Z. W. (2006). Primary study of establishing an affective sound system of China. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 20(11), 709-712.
	[ 刘涛生, 马慧, 黄宇霞, 罗跃嘉, 严进, 刘伟志. (2006). 建立情绪声音刺激库的初步研究. 中国心理卫生杂志, 20(11), 709-712.]
[24]	Liu W. J., Ding X. F., Cheng X. R., & Fan Z. (2022). Serial dependence effect: A novel “history effect”. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(10), 2228-2239. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02228 URL
	[ 柳王娟, 定险峰, 程晓荣, 范炤. (2022). 序列依赖效应——一种全新的“历史效应”. 心理科学进展, 30(10), 2228-2239.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02228
[25]	Mehrabian A., & Russell J. A. (1974). The basic emotional impact of environments. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 38(1), 283-301. pmid: 4815507
[26]	Mei G., Chen S., & Dong B. (2019). Working memory maintenance modulates serial dependence effects of perceived emotional expression. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1610. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01610 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01610 URL pmid: 31354595
[27]	Navon D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9(3), 353-383. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 URL
[28]	Öhman A., & Mineka S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108(3), 483-522. pmid: 11488376
[29]	Palumbo L., & Jellema T. (2013). Beyond face value: Does involuntary emotional anticipation shape the perception of dynamic facial expressions? PloS One, 8(2), e56003. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056003 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056003 URL
[30]	Parducci A., & Wedell D. H. (1986). The category effect with rating scales: Number of categories, number of stimuli, and method of presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12(4), 496-516. pmid: 2946806
[31]	Prigent E., Amorim M., & Oliveira A. M. (2018). Representational momentum in dynamic facial expressions is modulated by the level of expressed pain: Amplitude and direction effects. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 80(1), 82-93.
[32]	Reinl M., & Bartels A. (2015). Perception of temporal asymmetries in dynamic facial expressions. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1107. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01107 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01107 URL pmid: 26300807
[33]	Sato W., Kochiyama T., & Yoshikawa S. (2010). Amygdala activity in response to forward versus backward dynamic facial expressions. Brain Research, 1315, 92-99. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.12.003 pmid: 20025856
[34]	Sato W., & Yoshikawa S. (2004). The dynamic aspects of emotional facial expressions. Cognition and Emotion, 18(5), 701-710. doi: 10.1080/02699930341000176 URL
[35]	Sato W., & Yoshikawa S. (2007). Enhanced experience of emotional arousal in response to dynamic facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31(2), 119-135. doi: 10.1007/s10919-007-0025-7 URL
[36]	Slepian M. L., & Carr E. W. (2019). Facial expressions of authenticity: Emotion variability increases judgments of trustworthiness and leadership. Cognition, 183, 82-98. doi: S0010-0277(18)30267-1 pmid: 30445313
[37]	Ueda Y., Nagoya K., Yoshikawa S., & Nomura M. (2017). Forming facial expressions influences assessment of others' dominance but not trustworthiness. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2097. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02097 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02097 URL pmid: 29250018
[38]	Warriner A. B., Kuperman V., & Brysbaert M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13, 915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1191-1207. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0314-x pmid: 23404613
[39]	Wedell D. H., Parducci A., & Geiselman R. E. (1987). A formal analysis of ratings of physical attractiveness: Successive contrast and simultaneous assimilation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23(3), 230-249. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(87)90034-5 URL
[40]	Wen F. F., Ke W. L., He S. F., Zuo B., Li L. X., Ma S. H., & Wang J. (2022). The effect of group identity shifting on impression updating in older adults: The mediating role of common ingroup identity. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(9), 1059-1075. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.01059
	[ 温芳芳, 柯文琳, 何赛飞, 佐斌, 李兰心, 马书瀚, 王晶. (2022). 群体身份变换性对老年人印象更新的影响:共同内群体认同的中介作用. 心理学报, 54(9), 1059-1075.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.01059
[41]	Ying H., & Xu H. (2017). Adaptation reveals that facial expression averaging occurs during rapid serial presentation. Journal of Vision, 17(1), 1-19.
[42]	Yoshikawa S., & Sato W. (2008). Dynamic facial expressions of emotion induce representational momentum. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(1), 25-31.
[43]	Zhai K., & Zhang Z. J. (2011). Theoretical models of representation momentum. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(4), 528-536.
	[ 翟坤, 张志杰. (2011). 表征动量的理论模型述评. 心理科学进展, 19(4), 528-536.]
[44]	Zhang Q., Yin T. Z., & Ran G. M. (2015). Psychological and neural mechanisms for the superiority effect of dynamic facial expressions. Advances in Psychological Science, 23(9), 1514-1522. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.01514
	[ 张琪, 尹天子, 冉光明. (2015). 动态面孔表情优势效应的心理机制及神经基础. 心理科学进展, 23(9), 1514-1522.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.01514

		总体平均表征
		75%高兴	25%高兴
强度变化方向	从强到弱	100%高兴−50%高兴	50%高兴−中性
强度变化方向	从弱到强	50%高兴−100%高兴	中性−50%高兴

		总体平均表征
		75%高兴	25%高兴
强度变化方向	从强到弱	100%高兴−50%高兴	50%高兴−中性
强度变化方向	从弱到强	50%高兴−100%高兴	中性−50%高兴

情绪维度	实验条件	M	t	df	p
效价	100%高兴−50%高兴	3.84	-1.24	31	0.226
	50%高兴−中性	3.08	-7.17	31	< 0.001
	50%高兴−100%高兴	5.40	14.12	31	< 0.001
	中性−50%高兴	4.87	8.06	31	< 0.001
唤醒度	100%高兴−50%高兴	3.97	-0.25	31	0.803
	50%高兴−中性	3.63	-1.72	31	0.096
	50%高兴−100%高兴	4.30	1.59	31	0.122
	中性−50%高兴	3.93	-0.51	31	0.616
优势度	100%高兴−50%高兴	4.24	2.28	31	0.029
	50%高兴−中性	4.76	6.10	31	< 0.001
	50%高兴−100%高兴	3.22	-5.38	31	< 0.001
	中性−50%高兴	3.49	-5.15	31	< 0.001

情绪维度	实验条件	M	t	df	p
效价	100%高兴−50%高兴	3.84	-1.24	31	0.226
	50%高兴−中性	3.08	-7.17	31	< 0.001
	50%高兴−100%高兴	5.40	14.12	31	< 0.001
	中性−50%高兴	4.87	8.06	31	< 0.001
唤醒度	100%高兴−50%高兴	3.97	-0.25	31	0.803
	50%高兴−中性	3.63	-1.72	31	0.096
	50%高兴−100%高兴	4.30	1.59	31	0.122
	中性−50%高兴	3.93	-0.51	31	0.616
优势度	100%高兴−50%高兴	4.24	2.28	31	0.029
	50%高兴−中性	4.76	6.10	31	< 0.001
	50%高兴−100%高兴	3.22	-5.38	31	< 0.001
	中性−50%高兴	3.49	-5.15	31	< 0.001

		最后一帧表情强度
		50%高兴	100%高兴
表情状态	动态	100%高兴−50%高兴	50%高兴−100%高兴
表情状态	静态	静态50%高兴	静态100%高兴