ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2017
Comparison of Ecological Micro-Expression Recognition in Patients with Depression and Healthy Individuals.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low mood, not anxiety, connected with micro facial expression recognition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An open label pilot study of micro expression recognition training as an intervention for low mood.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Influence of Face Masks on Micro-Expression Recognition.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The establishment of dynamic microexpression training tool.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Relationship between low mood and micro-expression processing: evidence of negative bias in interpreting fleeting facial expressions.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- The establishment of the general microexpression recognition ability and its relevant brain activity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Oxytocin Impairs the Recognition of Micro-Expressions of Surprise and Disgust.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- An ingroup disadvantage in recognizing micro-expressions.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The relevant resting-state brain activity of ecological microexpression recognition test (EMERT).PloS one · 2020Observational
- The Establishment of Pseudorandom Ecological Microexpression Recognition Test (PREMERT) and Its Relevant Resting-State Brain Activity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- Ecological micro-expression recognition characteristics of young adults with subthreshold depression.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have focused on the characteristics of ordinary facial expressions in patients with depression, and have not investigated the processing characteristics of ecological micro-expressions (MEs, i.e., MEs that presented in different background expressions) in these patients. Based on this, adopting the ecological MEs recognition paradigm, this study aimed to comparatively evaluate facial ME recognition in depressed and healthy individuals. The findings of the study are as follows: (1) background expression: the accuracy (ACC) in the neutral background condition tended to be higher than that in the fear background condition, and the reaction time (RT) in the neutral background condition was significantly longer than that in other backgrounds. The type of ME and its interaction with the type of background expression could affect participants' ecological MEs recognition ACC and speed. Depression type: there was no significant difference between the ecological MEs recognition ACC of patients with depression and healthy individuals, but the patients' RT was significantly longer than that of healthy individuals; and (2) patients with depression judged happy MEs that were presented against different backgrounds as neutral and judged neutral MEs that were presented against sad backgrounds as sad. The present study suggested the following: (1) ecological MEs recognition was influenced by background expressions. The ACC of happy MEs was the highest, of neutral ME moderate and of sadness and fear the lowest. The response to the happy MEs was significantly shorter than that of identifying other MEs. It is necessary to conduct research on ecological MEs recognition; (2) the speed of patients with depression in identifying ecological MEs was slower than of healthy individuals; indicating that the patients' cognitive function was impaired; and (3) the patients with depression showed negative bias in the ecological MEs recognition task, reflecting the lack of happy ME recognition ability and the generalized identification of sad MEs in those patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.