Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37293681›Full record

ArticleAffective science2023

How Pain-Related Facial Expressions Are Evaluated in Relation to Gender, Race, and Emotion.

Troy C Dildine, Carolyn M Amir, Julie Parsons, Lauren Y Atlas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Affective science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [AI in rehabilitation-application of artificial mental models for personalized medicine].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Troy C Dildine10, Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health.
Carolyn M Amir10, Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health.
Julie Parsons10, Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health.
Lauren Y Atlas10, Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health.

Funding

Interdisciplinary Research Training in Pain and Substance Use DisordersT32DA035165 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SEAN C MACKEY · 2013 to 2026
$7.2M
Neural and psychological mechanisms of pain perception ZIAAT000030 · NCCIH · NATIONAL CENTER FOR COMPLEMENTARY & INTEGRATIVE HEALTH · PI ATLAS, LAUREN · 2015 to 2025
$3.8M
Sociocultural & biobehavioral influences on pain expression and assessmentZIAAT000036 · NCCIH · NATIONAL CENTER FOR COMPLEMENTARY & INTEGRATIVE HEALTH · PI ATLAS, LAUREN · 2018 to 2025
$2.7M
Large-Scale Online stimulus Norming and Surveys about Perceptions in HealthcareZIAAT000035 · NCCIH · NATIONAL CENTER FOR COMPLEMENTARY & INTEGRATIVE HEALTH · PI ATLAS, LAUREN · 2018 to 2025
$478k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA AT000030NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA035165
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inequities in pain assessment are well-documented; however, the psychological mechanisms underlying such biases are poorly understood. We investigated potential perceptual biases in the judgments of faces displaying pain-related movements. Across five online studies, 956 adult participants viewed images of computer-generated faces ("targets") that varied in features related to race (Black and White) and gender (women and men). Target identity was manipulated across participants, and each target had equivalent facial movements that displayed varying intensities of movement in facial action-units related to pain (Studies 1-4) or pain and emotion (Study 5). On each trial, participants provided categorical judgments as to whether a target was in pain (Studies 1-4) or which expression the target displayed (Study 5) and then rated the perceived intensity of the expression. Meta-analyses of Studies 1-4 revealed that movement intensity was positively associated with both categorizing a trial as painful and perceived pain intensity. Target race and gender did not consistently affect pain-related judgments, contrary to well-documented clinical inequities. In Study 5, in which pain was equally likely relative to other emotions, pain was the least frequently selected emotion (5%). Our results suggest that perceivers can utilize facial movements to evaluate pain in other individuals, but perceiving pain may depend on contextual factors. Furthermore, assessments of computer-generated, pain-related facial movements online do not replicate sociocultural biases observed in the clinic. These findings provide a foundation for future studies comparing CGI and real images of pain and emphasize the need for further work on the relationship between pain and emotion. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-023-00181-6.

Indexed as

Emotion recognitionFacial expressionsHealth inequitiesPain assessment

Identifiers

PMID37293681
PMCPMC9982800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.