| Literature DB >> 23888132 |
Mariateresa Sestito1, Maria Alessandra Umiltà, Giancarlo De Paola, Renata Fortunati, Andrea Raballo, Emanuela Leuci, Simone Maffei, Matteo Tonna, Mario Amore, Carlo Maggini, Vittorio Gallese.
Abstract
Emotional facial expression is an important low-level mechanism contributing to the experience of empathy, thereby lying at the core of social interaction. Schizophrenia is associated with pervasive social cognitive impairments, including emotional processing of facial expressions. In this study we test a novel paradigm in order to investigate the evaluation of the emotional content of perceived emotions presented through dynamic expressive stimuli, facial mimicry evoked by the same stimuli, and their functional relation. Fifteen healthy controls and 15 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia were presented with stimuli portraying positive (laugh), negative (cry) and neutral (control) emotional stimuli in visual, auditory modalities in isolation, and congruently or incongruently associated. Participants where requested to recognize and quantitatively rate the emotional value of the perceived stimuli, while electromyographic activity of Corrugator and Zygomaticus muscles was recorded. All participants correctly judged the perceived emotional stimuli and prioritized the visual over the auditory modality in identifying the emotion when they were incongruently associated (Audio-Visual Incongruent condition). The neutral emotional stimuli did not evoke any muscle responses and were judged by all participants as emotionally neutral. Control group responded with rapid and congruent mimicry to emotional stimuli, and in Incongruent condition muscle responses were driven by what participants saw rather than by what they heard. Patient group showed a similar pattern only with respect to negative stimuli, whereas showed a lack of or a non-specific Zygomaticus response when positive stimuli were presented. Finally, we found that only patients with reduced facial mimicry (Internalizers) judged both positive and negative emotions as significantly more neutral than controls. The relevance of these findings for studying emotional deficits in schizophrenia is discussed.Entities:
Keywords: EMG; emotions; empathy; facial mimicry; schizophrenia; simulation
Year: 2013 PMID: 23888132 PMCID: PMC3719033 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
Demographic variables and characteristics of Schizophrenia (SZP) and Control (CNT) participants.
| Age (years) | 32.80 | 1.69 | 25–49 | 35.80 | 2.28 | 25–53 | |
| SAPS | 26.67 | 4.17 | 0–170 | ||||
| SANS | 48.09 | 4.56 | 0–125 | ||||
| PAS | 26.36 | 2.26 | 0–61 | >18 | |||
| SAS | 19.00 | 1.74 | 0–40 | >12 | |||
| Simpson-Angus Scale | 0.36 | 0.04 | 0–4 | >0.65 | |||
| Duration of illness (years) | 11.23 | 1.30 | 2–24 | ||||
| Age at first psychosis | 22.69 | 0.66 | 19–28 | ||||
| Number of hospitalizations | 3.83 | 0.38 | 2–7 | ||||
| Dose of typical and atypical antipsychotics | 32.85 | 4.93 | |||||
| Dose of atypical antipsychotics | 24.84 | 4.00 | |||||
| Dose of typical antipsychotics | 8.01 | 1.48 | |||||
Drugs are expressed as the cumulative value measured in dose-years in the form of (chlorpromazine equivalent in mg) × (time on dose measured in years) (Andreasen et al., 2010).
Figure 1Experimental paradigm. Photographs illustrate examples of stimuli depicting Laugh (A), Cry (B) and Control (C).
Figure 2Averaged rating scores detected for each modality (AVC, Audio-Visual Congruent; AVI, Audio-Visual Incongruent; A, Audio; V, Video) and emotion (Laugh, Cry, Control). Error bars represent standard errors of mean (SE).
Figure 3Mean EMG responses recorded for . The significant differences are indicated by colored asterisks (red for CNT, blue for SZP). Asterisks located in the upper part of the panels indicated a significant activations with respect to Control stimuli; asterisks located in the lower part of the panels indicated significant differences between emotions. Y-axis: 100% represents the mean EMG response of the baseline. X-axis: Time Periods (T1: 0–500 ms, T2: 500–1000 ms, T3: 1000–1500 ms, T4: 1500–2000 ms). Error bars represent standard errors of mean (SE).
Figure 4Mean EMG responses recorded for . All other conventions as in Figure 3.
Figure 5Mean rating scores of Externalizer and Internalizer cohorts during the presentation of Positive (A) and Negative (B) emotions. Asterisks represent significant differences between SZP and CNT. All other conventions as in Figure 3.