| Literature DB >> 26528229 |
Tiziana Aureli1, Annalisa Grazia1, Daniela Cardone2, Arcangelo Merla2.
Abstract
Behavioral and facial thermal responses were recorded in twelve 3- to 4-month-old infants during the Still-Face Paradigm (SFP). As in the usual procedure, infants were observed in a three-step, face-to-face interaction: a normal interaction episode (3 min); the "still-face" episode in which the mother became unresponsive and assumed a neutral expression (1 min); a reunion episode in which the mother resumed the interaction (3 min). A fourth step that consisted of a toy play episode (5 min) was added for our own research interest. We coded the behavioral responses through the Infant and Caregiver Engagement Phases system, and recorded facial skin temperature via thermal infrared (IR) imaging. Comparing still-face episode to play episode, the infants' communicative engagement decreased, their engagement with the environment increased, and no differences emerged in self-regulatory and protest behaviors. We also found that facial skin temperature increased. For the behavioral results, infants recognized the interruption of the interactional reciprocity caused by the still-face presentation, without showing upset behaviors. According to autonomic results, the parasympathetic system was more active than the sympathetic, as usually happens in aroused but not distressed situations. With respect to the debate about the causal factor of the still-face effect, thermal data were consistent with behavioral data in showing this effect as related to the infants' expectations of the nature of the social interactions being violated. Moreover, as these are associated to the infants' subsequent interest in the environment, they indicate the thermal IR imaging as a reliable technique for the detection of physiological variations not only in the emotional system, as indicated by research to date, but also in the attention system. Using this technique for the first time during the SFP allowed us to record autonomic data in a more ecological manner than in previous studies.Entities:
Keywords: autonomic nervous system; infant bio-behavioral responses; infants’ sensitivity to interactional reciprocity; still-face paradigm; thermal infrared imaging
Year: 2015 PMID: 26528229 PMCID: PMC4604256 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01586
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Infant and caregiver engagement phases (ICEP; .
| The infant displays facial expressions of anger, grimaces, and/or is fussing, crying, arching her/his back, trying to get away, gesturing | |
| The infant is withdrawn and minimally engaged with the caregiver | |
| The infant looks at proximal or distal objects with an interested, neutral or positive facial expression, and may or may not vocalize | |
| The infant looks at the caregiver’s face with a neutral or interested facial expression, and may vocalize in a neutral/positive manner | |
| The infant looks toward the caregiver’s face with facial expressions of joy, including particularly smiles, and occasionally coos and play faces; the infant might vocalize in a positive manner, laughing, babbling, or squealing | |
| The infant is asleep | |
| The infant’s face is obscured because of poor cameras angles or technical problems, or because the adult is blocking the camera focused on the baby | |
| The infant sucks on or brings to the mouth his/her thumb or wrist, something other than his/her body, and the mother’s hand or finger | |
| The infant’s two hands are touching | |
| The infant attempts to increase his/her physical distance from the caregiver without engaging an object | |
| The infant shows behaviors that might indicate stress or autonomic arousal, such as spitting up or hiccupping |
Means, standard deviations, and results of the Friedman tests and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests that compared infants' behavioural responses across the episodes of the Still-Face Paradigm.
| Looking around | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 5.89 |
| Object engagement | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.39 | 0.72 | 9.81* |
| Social monitor | 0.39 | 0.37 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 3.50 |
| Social positive engagement | 0.07 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 16.22*** |
| Protest | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.14 | 0.02 | 3.96 |
| Oral self-comforting | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 1.46 |
| Self-clasp | 0.22 | 0.34 | 0.21 | 0.18 | 4.41 |
Mean values with differing subscripts within rows are significantly different at p < 0.05, except for the comparison between Pre still-face and still-face for Social Positive Engagement, which was significant at p < 0.01. SF, Still-Face. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
FIGURE 1Representative example of the variations in an infant’s facial temperature during the episodes of the Still-Face Paradigm.
FIGURE 2Pattern of the temperature in the nasal tip across the episodes of the Still-Face Paradigm.
FIGURE 3Pattern of the temperature in the forehead across the episodes of the Still-Face Paradigm.