Twenty abused and 20 nonabused pairs of children (3 to 7 years of age) and their mothers participated in a facial expression posing task and a facial expression recognition task. The expressions produced by subjects were judged on emotion content by naive raters and were coded using Friesen and Ekman's (1984) Emotion Facial Action Coding System (EMFACS). Data analysis indicated that abused children and their mothers pose less recognizable expressions than nonabused children and mothers. Although abused children were less accurate than nonabused children in recognizing emotional expressions, there was no difference in recognition accuracy between the two groups of mothers. A significant correlation between mothers' posing scores and children's recognition scores was also obtained. These results suggest that abused children may not observe easily interpreted voluntary displays of emotion by their mothers as often as nonabused children. This may partially explain the difference in recognition (and production) abilities of abused and nonabused children.

20 maltreated and 20 nonmaltreated children (ages = 3-7 years) and their mothers were observed during a laboratory play session and 7 home observation visits. Ss facial behavior was video recorded in the lab and coded live by observers in the home. Children also participated in an emotionalexpression recognition task. Data analysis showed that both maltreatment status and mothers' facial behavior were predictors of children's recognition scores. Positive relationships were also found between mothers' and children's expressive behavior. Although maltreated and nonmaltreated children differed significantly in their recognition of emotional facial expressions, group differences were not found for either mothers' or children's expressive behavior. Overall, this study's findings indicate that children's recognition and production of facial expressions depends in part on the expressive environment provided by their mothers.

No abstract

The present review aimed to analyze the scientific literature untill 2010 about the theories of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder in order to make clear how a biological and cognitive hypotheses might be integrated in a comprehensive point of view. In the analysis, at biological level were included neuroanatomic and neurophysiologic models and animal models; instead at cognitive level were included different theories of Salwoskies, Van den Hout, Mancini e Rachman. Biological, cognitive, and behavioral elements of the theories have to be clearly distinguished between specific and general conditions, as do critical past events and current trigger conditions. The theories compared were drawn from the neurobiological, cognitive, and behavioral literature that proposed empirical supported models. We conclude that there are substantive differences among the cognitive theories and between the biological theories reviewed. However, cognitive and biological theories appear to be compatible in principle. It is not clear whether substantive differences among theories are due to the existence of subtypes of OCD or due to the predominance of multifactorial cause. It is argued that current treatment methods imply particular theories, and that particular patterns of success and failure can be understood in relation to theory through the methods we have employed.

No abstract