ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
The establishment of dynamic microexpression training tool.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The existing microexpression training tool METT only trains the static microexpression recognition ability under neutral background, but does not train the dynamic microexpression recognition ability under expression backgrounds. Therefore, in the current study, the dynamic microexpression recognition ability test DMERT was used as pretest and posttest, the METT recognition techniques were guided and trained, and the dynamic microexpression training tool DMETT was established as a training tool for dynamic microexpression recognition ability. The experiment was conducted in 3 stages (pretest vs. training vs. posttest) × 7 (background expression: sadness vs. Disgust vs. fear vs. anger vs. surprise vs. happiness vs. Neutral) × 2 (background expression emotional arousal: 3 vs. 5) × 6 (dynamic microexpression: sadness vs. Disgust vs. fear vs. anger vs. surprise vs. happiness) × 2 (emotional arousal of dynamic microexpression: 1 → 2 → 3 → 2 → 1 vs. 3 → 4 → 5 → 4 → 3). The results showed that: (1) The DMETT could effectively improve dynamic microexpression recognition ability with good reliability and validity. (2) The METT recognition techniques were suitable for training dynamic microexpression recognition ability. (3) The DMETT could be used as a training tool of dynamic microexpression recognition ability, and can be further verified to serve as a measurement tool of microexpression learning ability in the future. (4) There was no gender difference in general dynamic microexpression recognition ability, but females outperformed males in general dynamic microexpression recognition learning with small effect sizes.
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.