ArticlePloS one2020
Comparing static and dynamic emotion recognition tests: Performance of healthy participants.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the value of dynamic versus static image-based tests of emotion recognition in neurodegenerative disease.Journal of neuropsychology · 2026Article
- Psychological dynamics and adaptive processes of negative online social interactions among university students: a qualitative study in higher education digital environments.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Cross-country variance in facial emotion recognition in presymptomatic and symptomatic behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia: Insights from the GENFI and ReDLat consortia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Observational
- Emotion Recognition and Self-Reported Emotion Processing in Alcohol and Cannabis Co-Using Young Adults.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Construction of face databases for tasks to recognize facial expressions of basic emotions: a systematic review.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2022Review
- Emotion Recognition in a Health Continuum: Comparison of Healthy Adults of Advancing Age, Community Dwelling Adults Bearing Vascular Risk Factors and People Diagnosed with Mild Cognitive Impairment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Law Enforcement Officers' Ability to Recognize Emotions: The Role of Personality Traits and Basic Needs' Satisfaction.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Training Emotion Recognition Accuracy: Results for Multimodal Expressions and Facial Micro Expressions.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Auditory and Visual Integration for Emotion Recognition and Compensation for Degraded Signals are Preserved With Age.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Facial expressions have a communicatory function and the ability to read them is a prerequisite for understanding feelings and thoughts of other individuals. Impairments in recognition of facial emotional expressions are frequently found in patients with neurological conditions (e.g. stroke, traumatic brain injury, frontotemporal dementia). Hence, a standard neuropsychological assessment should include measurement of emotion recognition. However, there is debate regarding which tests are most suitable. The current study evaluates and compares three different emotion recognition tests. 84 healthy participants were included and assessed with three tests, in varying order: a. Ekman 60 Faces Test (FEEST) b. Emotion Recognition Task (ERT) c. Emotion Evaluation Test (EET). The tests differ in type of stimuli from static photographs (FEEST) to more dynamic stimuli in the form of morphed photographs (ERT) to videos (EET). Comparing performances on the three tests, the lowest total scores (67.3% correct answers) were found for the ERT. Significant, but moderate correlations were found between the total scores of the three tests, but nearly all correlations between the same emotions across different tests were not significant. Furthermore, we found cross-over effects of the FEEST and EET to the ERT; participants attained higher total scores on the ERT when another emotion recognition test had been administered beforehand. Moreover, the ERT proved to be sensitive to the effects of age and education. The present findings indicate that despite some overlap, each emotion recognition test measures a unique part of the construct. The ERT seemed to be the most difficult test: performances were lowest and influenced by differences in age and education and it was the only test that showed a learning effect after practice with other tests. This highlights the importance of appropriate norms.
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.