Observational studyPloS one2020
The relevant resting-state brain activity of ecological microexpression recognition test (EMERT).
Observational study in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The establishment of dynamic microexpression training tool.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Sensorimotor regulation of facial expression - An untouched frontier.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2024Review
- The establishment of the general microexpression recognition ability and its relevant brain activity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Zhang, et al. (2017) established the ecological microexpression recognition test (EMERT), but it only used white models' expressions as microexpressions and backgrounds, and there was no research detecting its relevant brain activity. The current study used white, black and yellow models' expressions as microexpressions and backgrounds to improve the materials ecological validity of EMERT, and it used eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-state fMRI to detect relevant brain activity of EMERT for the first time. The results showed: (1) Two new recapitulative indexes of EMERT were adopted, such as microexpression M and microexpression SD. The participants could effectively identify almost all the microexpressions, and each microexpression type had a significantly background effect. The EMERT had good retest reliability and calibration validity. (2) ALFFs (Amplitude of Low-Frequency Fluctuations) in both eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states and ALFFs-difference could predict microexpression M. The relevant brain areas of microexpression M were some frontal lobes, insula, cingulate cortex, hippocampus, parietal lobe, caudate nucleus, thalamus, amygdala, occipital lobe, fusiform, temporal lobe, cerebellum and vermis. (3) ALFFs in both eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states and ALFFs-difference could predict microexpression SD, and the ALFFs-difference was more predictive. The relevant brain areas of microexpression SD were some frontal lobes, insula, cingulate cortex, cuneus, amygdala, fusiform, occipital lobe, parietal lobe, precuneus, caudate lobe, putamen lobe, thalamus, temporal lobe, cerebellum and vermis. (4) There were many similarities and some differences in the relevant brain areas between microexpression M and SD. All these brain areas can be trained to enhance ecological microexpression recognition ability.
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.