| Literature DB >> 24860535 |
Joakim Svärd1, Håkan Fischer2, Daniel Lundqvist3.
Abstract
Although younger and older adults appear to attend to and remember emotional faces differently, less is known about age-related differences in the subjective emotional impression (arousal, potency, and valence) of emotional faces and how these differences, in turn, are reflected in age differences in various emotional tasks. In the current study, we used the same facial emotional stimuli (angry and happy faces) in four tasks: emotional rating, attention, categorical perception, and visual short-term memory (VSTM). The aim of this study was to investigate effects of age on the subjective emotional impression of angry and happy faces and to examine whether any age differences were mirrored in measures of emotional behavior (attention, categorical perception, and memory). In addition, regression analyses were used to further study impression-behavior associations. Forty younger adults (range 20-30 years) and thirty-nine older adults (range 65-75 years) participated in the experiment. The emotional rating task showed that older adults perceived less arousal, potency, and valence than younger adults and that the difference was more pronounced for angry than happy faces. Similarly, the results of the attention and memory tasks demonstrated interaction effects between emotion and age, and age differences on these measures were larger for angry than for happy faces. Regression analyses confirmed that in both age groups, higher potency ratings predicted both visual search and VSTM efficiency. Future studies should consider the possibility that age differences in the subjective emotional impression of facial emotional stimuli may explain age differences in attention to and memory of such stimuli.Entities:
Keywords: aging; arousal; attention; categorical perception; emotion; faces; memory; subjective rating
Year: 2014 PMID: 24860535 PMCID: PMC4030188 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00423
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Participant characteristics by age group.
| Age in years ( | 25.2 (10.5) | 70.5 (2.8) | <0.001 | 13.127 |
| Sex | 21 F, 19 M | 24 F, 15 M | ||
| Education in years ( | 14.6 (2.9) | 14.5 (2.9) | 0.831 | 0.049 |
| MMSE ( | 29 (0.9; 26–30) | 28.7 (1.4; 24–30) | 0.295 | 0.237 |
| HADS | 5 (3.5; 0–13) | 3.4 (3.0; 0–15) | 0.028 | 0.509 |
| HADS | 3.1 (2.3; 0–12) | 2.9 (2.2; 0–10) | 0.653 | 0.102 |
| STAI-T ( | 47.7 (4.8; 27–59) | 47 (3.1; 42–56) | 0.390 | 0.196 |
| STAI-S ( | 30.1 (5.8; 20–42) | 29 (5.2; 20–40) | 0.381 | 0.201 |
MMSE, mini mental state examination (Folstein et al., 1975); HADS, hospital anxiety and depression scale (Zigmond and Snaith, 1983); STAI, state-trait anxiety inventory (Spielberger et al., 1988); -T, Trait; -S, State;
anxiety items;
depression items; F, female; M, male; *p < 0.05.
Figure 1Examples of the face stimuli used in all four tasks. Note: Faces from the Averaged Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces set (Lundqvist and Litton, 1998).
Figure 2Examples of face pairs used in the categorical perception task (presented vertically). At study, the faces in each pair were presented side by side.
Figure 3Mean (SE) performance in the rating task (A), visual search task (B), categorical perception task, (C) and visual short-term memory task (D) separately for expression and age. Note. Error bars represent standard error. Results of the ANOVAs and t-tests for age differences are presented in the result section.
Figure 4Scatterplots for potency ratings and emotional behavior tasks, separately for visual search (A) and visual short-term memory (B) performance for angry faces across age. Note. Visual search: r = −0.372; Visual short-term memory: r = −0.312.
β-coefficients (SE) and bivariate correlations for rating scores associated with emotional behavior.
| Arousal | −0.25 (0.06) | −0.08 (0.06) | 0.03 (0.05) | −0.14 (0.04) | −0.15 (0.05) | −0.09 (0.04) |
| Potency | −0.36 (0.05) | −0.31 (0.06) | −0.21 (0.05) | −0.11 (0.05) | −0.08 (0.05) | 0.07 (0.04) |
| Valence | 0.13 (0.05) | 0.01 (0.05) | −0.07 (0.04) | −0.03 (0.04) | 0.08 (0.04) | 0.11 (0.03) |
| Arousal | −0.09 (1.68) | 0.12 (1.97) | 0.21 (1.78) | −0.10 (0.61) | −0.07 (0.73) | −0.04 (0.69) |
| Potency | −0.31 (1.53) | −0.37 (1.86) | −0.32 (1.67) | −0.19 (0.66) | −0.20 (0.74) | −0.11 (0.72) |
| Valence | 0.11 (1.57) | 0.04 (1.62) | −0.04 (1.47) | −0.03 (0.52) | 0.09 (0.62) | 0.12 (0.59) |
| Arousal | −0.19 (5.05) | −0.17 (6.26) | −0.12 (5.82) | 0.10 (4.41) | 0.05 (5.14) | 0.07 (5.13) |
| Potency | −0.12 (4.97) | −0.03 (6.11) | 0.07 (5.78) | 0.04 (5.07) | −0.03 (5.66) | 0.00 (5.67) |
| Valence | 0.07 (5.03) | 0.00 (5.43) | −0.03 (5.05) | 0.15 (4.04) | 0.14 (4.84) | 0.16 (4.82) |
| Arousal | – | 0.539 | −0.306 | – | 0.379 | 0.522 |
| Potency | – | −0.288 | – | 0.410 | ||
Model 1 was univariate; Model 2 was multivariate, adjusted for the other rating scales; and Model 3 was additionally adjusted for age.
p ≤ 0.01;
0.01 < p ≤ 0.05.