ArticleEmotion (Washington, D.C.)2019
Automaticity in the recognition of nonverbal emotional vocalizations.
Article in Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reading characters in voices: Ratings of personality characteristics from voices predict proneness to auditory verbal hallucinations.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Speak or shout? Nonverbal vocalizations promote rapid detection of emotions in vocal communication.PloS one · 2026Article
- The role of cognitive load in automatic integration of emotional information from face and body.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Conspecific alarm calls, but not food-associated calls, elicit affect-based and object-based mental representations in a bonobo (Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Article
- Emotion in Nonverbal Communication: Comparing Animal and Human Vocalizations and Human Text Messages.Emotion review : journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion · 2025Article
- Enhanced salience of musical sounds in singers and instrumentalists.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Pupil-Linked Arousal Response Reveals Aberrant Attention Regulation among Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022Article
- Emotional authenticity modulates affective and social trait inferences from voices.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Effects of aging on emotion recognition from dynamic multimodal expressions and vocalizations.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Higher trait mindfulness is associated with empathy but not with emotion recognition abilities.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- Where Sounds Occur Matters: Context Effects Influence Processing of Salient Vocalisations.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to perceive the emotions of others is crucial for everyday social interactions. Important aspects of visual socioemotional processing, such as the recognition of facial expressions, are known to depend on largely automatic mechanisms. However, whether and how properties of automaticity extend to the auditory domain remains poorly understood. Here we ask if nonverbal auditory emotion recognition is a controlled deliberate or an automatic efficient process, using vocalizations such as laughter, crying, and screams. In a between-subjects design (N = 112), and covering eight emotions (four positive), we determined whether emotion recognition accuracy (a) is improved when participants actively deliberate about their responses (compared with when they respond as fast as possible) and (b) is impaired when they respond under low and high levels of cognitive load (concurrent task involving memorizing sequences of six or eight digits, respectively). Response latencies were also measured. Mixed-effects models revealed that recognition accuracy was high across emotions, and only minimally affected by deliberation and cognitive load; the benefits of deliberation and costs of cognitive load were significant mostly for positive emotions, notably amusement/laughter, and smaller or absent for negative ones; response latencies did not suffer under low or high cognitive load; and high recognition accuracy (approximately 90%) could be reached within 500 ms after the stimulus onset, with performance exceeding chance-level already between 300 and 360 ms. These findings indicate that key features of automaticity, namely fast and efficient/effortless processing, might be a modality-independent component of emotion recognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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.